Within hours of taking office, President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order branding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs as “discrimination” stating that he wants to restore “merit-based” hiring, reflecting a mindset shared by many of his most fervent supporters that DEI is an acronym for “Didn’t Earn It.” However, not satisfied that this categorical rejection of a policy that has been in operation since the George Floyd murder, he went even further to not just end affirmative action in federal contracting but ordered all federal DEI staff be put on paid leave prior to their firing.
What is so upsetting is at least two false assumptions behind these actions go unquestioned by so many people and even companies. First, that a policy that encourages more inclusivity is interpreted as a way to exclude those who are white, male and in the minority. And secondly, the assumption that we live, now or in the past, within anything approaching a meritocracy. Arguably, the second assumption is the most damaging since it undergirds the wave of attacks DEI has received in recent years.
However, the truth is that most Americans reject the idea that there is anything like a meritocracy in the U.S. According to a 2023 Pew Research Center report,”most Americans agree that being white and a man helps his ability to get ahead in the U.S. today, and that being a person of color does not.” Additionally, most Americans accept that “being a woman, Hispanic, or Asian is more harmful than helpful.”
Michele Obama once made a pointed reference to “the affirmative action of generational wealth.” Harvard and many Ivy Leagues, as well as exclusive private schools reserve places for the children of alumna and many companies, law firms, boards, and senior executives are recruited from referrals made by white males. As Forbes magazine found “Legacy applicants from the top one percent of families with the highest incomes were five-times more likely to be admitted to an “Ivy-Plus” college than other students with comparable credentials.” A Payscale report reveals that “referrals overwhelmingly benefit white men more than any other demographic group. About 44 percent of all referrals are white men, while just 22 percent are white women.”
Trump’s assumptions are not just factually incorrect, they are timed to do maximum damage to the ways a vast number of companies are making progress in expanding their talent pool. For example, a survey of 300 companies for McKinsey & Company’s 2023 Women in the Workplace report revealed that 60 percent of respondents increased their staff and budget for DEI work over the past year, 34 percent maintained their staff and budget, and just 4 percent reported a decrease. And in one report, “in the three months following George Floyd’s murder, DEI job listings increased 123 percent, according to Indeed. The rate of new CDO hires in 2021 was nearly triple the rate of hires in the previous 16 months.”
What this controversy comes down is a conflict between those in the “in” group and those in the “out” group. The “in” group as this article points out is largely composed of white men who perceive DEI as a threat. The most vocal opposition is, of course, from the “in” group (largely white and male) who perceive their privileges are under attack by DEI policies. As Iyer in this article succinctly points out “such situations typically activate zero-sum beliefs the perception of a limited pool of resources so that gains for an outgroup necessarily involve losses for one’s own group. The evidence also strongly suggests that it is possible to expand talent and achieve gains in productivity if the talent pool is not restricted to one group or another. This makes sense to as this article notes the world’s most profitable companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google that contain among the most diverse workforces
The good news is that Iyer’s analysis helps us to figure out an exit strategy from this morass of mistaken assumptions and misinformed policies. Clearly leaders must stress the considerable gains for individuals from all groups. As Iyer states “The aim would be to demonstrate that everyone benefits from DEI policies, thus reducing the salience of zero-sum beliefs.”
The DEI conversation might be facing headwinds, but for large, as well as small businesses, diversity isn’t a fad, it’s a force multiplier. Diverse teams are smarter, more innovative, and better at serving a wider range of customers.
In my 18 years of experience in marketing and branding in the public, private, and non-profit sectors working for some top companies I have found this to be true: companies that respect diversity also know and respect their customers. Why? Because decisions fully informed by their teams’ unique cultural and social perspectives are just fundamentally better decisions based on better information and wider perspectives.
Here is my guidance going forward. Although companies are under increased pressure following President Trump’s executive actions to abandon DEI policies–DON’T. Because the President has now made the term DEI toxic, it’s probably better to talk about the need to create what I would name as an Inclusion and Opportunity model—IO for short. Managers should be announcing what they are for—the most effective use of everyone’s talent. The words DEI are not nearly as important as supporting a culture of belonging where all groups feel welcomed and accepted
Let’s look at what some of the top companies do, not necessarily what they say or don’t say about DEI. Google for example, according to one report “provides mentoring opportunities for members of underrepresented groups and encourages female employees to take on leadership roles in order to create a more diverse company culture.” Apple will spend “$100 million over the next decade to increase the number of Black software engineers, developers, entrepreneurs, and other tech workers within its ranks. Amazon offers grants to innovative female-led businesses and has a “12 affinity groups that are responsible for leading community-building, mentorship, and programs aimed at promoting customer inclusion and supporting the development of an inclusive culture.
Next time someone tells you that people are canceling their DEI initiatives, ask them why the top companies may have abandoned their rhetoric but not their policies to widen the talent pool. Ask them also why these top companies are headed by immigrants, or as one report notes of 2024, “a total of 230 Fortune 500 companies were either founded by immigrants or their children. If these companies were a standalone country, their GDP would rank as the third largest in the world, behind only the U.S. and China.”
So, lessons going forward that focus on actions not words:
1. When hiring, consider how you can bring in individuals who will add different perspectives to your team. For example, think about hiring someone from a different industry who can bring fresh ideas to your business. If all your hiring team are white men or women, consider expanding that team to better reflect your customer base
2. If you’re worried about legal challenges or want to ensure you’re offering equal opportunities to everyone, try focusing on skills and experience rather than specific demographic categories. Implementing “blind hiring” practices, where you remove identifying details like names or photos from applications, can help reduce bias in the hiring process.
3. Make DEI part of your business goals. DEI isn’t just a “nice to have.” It’s something that should be linked to your overall business goals. If your goal is to improve customer service, having a more diverse team can help because people from different backgrounds often bring unique perspectives which may lead to innovation. If you’re looking to boost employee retention, a focus on inclusion can make your workplace more welcoming and reduce turnover.
