DEI Is Something We All Rely On—Whether We Admit It or Not.
When companies are more inclusive, everyone profits. So when DEI gets shut down, it’s up to everyone to step up.
It didn’t even take 24 hours.
On the same day that President Donald Trump took his oath of office, solemnly swearing to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, he signed an executive order, ending what he called, “illegal discrimination” practices in the federal government.
He was talking about DEI. Diversity. Equity. Inclusion.
The order went on to describe DEI hiring practices as “dangerous, demeaning, and immoral race- and sex-based preferences.”
They “violate the text and spirit of our longstanding Federal civil-rights laws,” it read, and “deny, discredit, and undermine the traditional American values of hard work, excellence, and individual achievement.”
While some might think of DEI simply as a practice of hiring and promoting more women and people of color, this couldn’t be further from the truth. DEI encompasses a vast, vast, spectrum of policies, attitudes, behaviours and systems.
On a basic level, DEI promotes the fair treatment of all individuals, but it’s more than that. Sure, it can include hiring and promotion policies, or workplace training, but it might also encompass mentorship programmes or audits to ensure pay equity.
In a social media post, Camille Dundas, a DEI educator, offered a few examples: “DEI is the reason new moms can have access to a lactation room instead of pumping milk in a dusty storage closet. DEI is the reason people of all faiths can step away from their desk and have a space to pray,” she wrote. “DEI is the reason that neurodivergence in the workplace is being accommodated. DEI is the reason you can sue an employer if they refuse to reasonably accommodate your disability. DEI is the reason you can still advocate to work from home even though the pandemic is over.”
Going After DEI
By day two, the Trump administration was doubling down.
In a memo, his Office of Personnel Management—the federal government’s human resources arm—directed all government agencies to place DEI office staffers on paid leave by 5 p.m. the following day and to remove all public DEI-focused web pages by the same deadline.
It required federal agencies to cancel any DEI-related training and contracts related to DEI in any way. Federal workers were told that if they suspected a DEI-related program had been renamed to hide its actual purpose, they should report it to the Office of Personnel Management—or face “adverse consequences.” Welcome to DEI McCarthyism.
These moves are upsetting to say the least. Jobs have already been lost and will continue to be lost. It’s unclear how many will ultimately be affected.
Although the order doesn’t explicitly prevent public and private companies from hiring and promoting whomever they want, fear and confusion are rippling through organizations across every sector. The repercussions of the order are unclear. At this moment, there’s no telling how and to what extent this could reshape the labor market.
Despite the fact that practices within entities outside of the federal government are harder for Trump to police, his administration does appear to be trying to do just that. Indeed, part of the executive order directs federal agencies to each identify up to nine companies or other entities that might be of interest to the Trump administration for continuing to implement DEI practices that the president’s administration might deem in violation of civil laws.
In those entities, DEI practices could be deemed illegal by the government if, for example, an employer sets explicit quotas or states a preference for specific groups, like women or people of color. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex, race, national origin, religion and other traits. And while this piece of legislation has generally been credited with creating more diversity of opportunity, nothing is now stopping the government from using that same piece of legislation to argue that certain candidates are being given preferential treatment over others.
A handful of companies, including Morgan Stanley and the newspaper publisher Gannett, are already facing lawsuits which claim they discriminated against white men in pursuit of diversity goals. Courts have yet to issue final rulings in those cases.
Meanwhile, other companies—including Costco, Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan—have defended their DEI initiatives noting that diversity is not only good from a moral stand-point, but the right thing to do in terms of fiduciary duty to their shareholders.
The success of America as a country depends on all kinds of people wanting to work here. The success of business is underpinned by having a diversity of workers and a diversity of ideas. In both cases, Trump is spectacularly imperilling that.
Chronically Misunderstood
Almost immediately after Trump signed the executive order, social media platforms were ablaze with opinions and commentary. On LinkedIn, recruiters, HR professionals, DEI advocates and consultants were quick to point out that the government has fundamentally misunderstood what DEI even means.
“DEI is not identity-based hiring. DEI is not discrimination. DEI is ensuring your company is able to succeed in an ever changing world,” wrote Eric Schmidt, a recruiter. “DEI is ensuring that talented people are given a shot to showcase their skills and how they can add to the team.”
Nicollette Buckle, a consultant on the subject, elaborated that “DEI is not just counting bodies and meeting quotas.” DEI, she wrote, is about institutions “uphold[ing] basic human rights. That we might thrive and not merely survive. DEI is the legacy of the civil rights movement in the modern day workplace.”
Countless others added to the chorus, all alluding to a similar argument: No, DEI has not instigated a war on white men. No, DEI is not a zero-sum game. And no, an unqualified someone is not about to steal your job.
An Economic Case
The research on why DEI is good for organizations is almost too abundant and unequivocal to bother citing. We know that a diverse and inclusive workplace makes for an agile workplace; we know it makes for a creative and innovative workplace; we know it makes for a profitable and productive workplace.
What we’ve also learned is that those looking for a new job care profoundly about company culture, meaning that they want to work for a place that values them for who they are.
As recently as last week, Randstad, the world’s biggest employment agency, published sweeping research based on a survey of more than 26,000 employees across 35 countries.
It found that 59% of respondents said they do not think corporations are generally doing enough on equity. Almost two-thirds of those questioned said they think DEI initiatives make a genuine difference and over half said they wanted those initiatives to be more wide-ranging.
The other thing the survey revealed: If employees are not happy with company culture, they’re willing to walk. In fact, 45% of respondents said they had already campaigned for better conditions at work—which includes feeling less marginalized—and 44% said that they had at some point during their career gone so far as to quit their job because of what they deemed to be a toxic work environment.
The implications are clear: Pay can only get you so far. For a huge number of people, feeling like you belong is a non-negotiable.
A New Responsibility
If people can no longer rely on federal mandates and laws to encourage the types of opportunities that benefit everyone, companies, executives and leaders will need to compensate. That’s because when systems fail, humans have to step up. Those who run private companies, who manage teams, who teach students and yes, those who raise children and instill values in the next generation, must set the course on treating others as they would hope to be treated.
The future of our workplaces, our economies, and the health of our societies depends on everyone’s willingness to stand up for policies that include rather than exclude, that amplify rather than shut down, that draw on the diversity of ideas and the myriad talents this country has to offer. And we must do all of this, even if the leader of a government is modeling behavior that suggests otherwise.
We need to practice kindness when doing so might feel futile. We need to champion community when going inwards might feel easier. We need to advocate when it’s necessary.
DEI may no longer be the acronym we use to describe it—in fact, perhaps it shouldn’t be—but the spirit of DEI is something we all rely on, whether we’re willing to admit it or not.
Ruchika T. Malhotra
Josie Cox
Haley Swenson
