In Feb 2023, Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s chief of staff issued a memo condemning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the workplace, suggesting that they are problematic and discriminatory without specifying which groups are affected. This move comes after similar efforts in Florida, where Governor Ron DeSatnis tried to block DEI workplace training programs and remove DEI-themed programs and workplace commitments from the state’s education system.
Target, a company that has always promoted merchandise which celebrated LGBTQ+ pride for more than ten years, has requested a selected handful of stores to get rid of such products after conservative activists accused the company of sexualising children and threatened them with a boycott.
While these are just two examples from the U.S, this current trend that workplaces have started to adopt around the globe, warrants scrutiny. These actions reflect a broader debate and political discussion about DEI initiatives and their role in workplaces. Supporters argue that DEI initiatives aim to promote fairness, inclusivity, and equal opportunities, while critics contend that they may have unintended consequences or unfairly target certain groups. By the looks of it, corporate diversity has been thrown to the sharks and many are looking to pull the plug on it.
Workplaces calling quits on DEI
While it is said that it was initially an angry cluster of straight, white males who were quite disdained and felt betrayed because they complained that implementing DEI frameworks excluded them from the picture, this ideology has now infected many people.
On February 16 2023, a Fox News host placed the blame on ‘diversity initiatives’ for the Ohio train derailment. She said:
“We think of him as Mayor Pete, too. Or maybe just Paternity Pete. The man should never have been put in this position in the first place and should be fired immediately. Any cabinet official or senior staff member who takes extended paternity leave while our supply chains are breaking down — by definition, that person is unserious.
Now, this is what happens when you prioritize diversity and equity over competence and experience. America just ends up with a cabinet filled with nincompoops, radicals who point fingers instead of solving problems. And unfortunately for Ohio, the results may be deadly”
The above is just one of the many disingenuous claims that are spreading a false idea that DEI is somehow the culprit behind business failures such as the train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, or the crumbling down of the Silicon Valley Bank. However, neither these ‘failures’ nor an unstable economy can be pinned on DEI at workplaces, because we all know that is not the real reason. Nevertheless, it is being used as an excuse to defame it and get rid of chief diversity officers. Many companies are shamelessly milking this excuse by using it as a viable reason to cut back on their budgets and staff dedicated to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, and shifting towards a workplace culture that avoids focusing on race or specific identities. Such actions make many question as to why these changes are happening now, just three years after business leaders publicly pledged their dedication to DEI and anti-racism initiatives in the wake of George Floyd’s murder?
Reasons behind the anti-DEI hysteria
Somehow DEI is now branded as some sinister ploy that is trying to eliminate everyone else but the ‘marginalized’. And many believe that the reason behind this allergic reaction towards DEI was because the commitment was fake from the start and that many did it for the sake of being diverse and to win brownie points.
In June 2020, when business leaders suddenly proclaimed their organizations’ strong commitment to DEI, Black employees and other people of color had valid reasons to doubt these declarations. Their previous experiences in these workplaces had made them skeptical of the abrupt shift. It seemed insincere, as if the company was only doing it to avoid being seen as racist. These leaders didn’t appear genuinely committed, especially in the long run.
Apart from the lack of commitment, once DEI initiatives were implemented, along with it came about significant changes within organizations, and these changes can trigger feelings of threat and concern, especially among members of the majority group. This phenomenon is referred to as “status threat.” Those experiencing it often view diversity initiatives as a zero-sum game, fearing that if minority group members gain opportunities or advancements, it will come at the expense of the majority group.
Additionally, some individuals may fear that DEI initiatives suggest that their personal achievements are solely due to their group membership rather than their skills and qualities. This is known as “merit threat” and is particularly common among majority group members who strongly believe in the value of hard work and individual merit. It’s also prevalent when DEI initiatives impact decisions traditionally associated with recognizing merit, such as promotions.
Lastly, members of the majority group might experience “moral threat.” This occurs when acknowledging their privilege makes them feel morally compromised by associating themselves with an unfair system. Moral threat is most likely when majority group members are committed to the moral principle of equality because people generally want to see themselves as good and moral.
While most of the discomfort that people are showing towards DEI is psychological, the way that they react to it could go as far as being physically violent. This is when matters get more serious. One of the most recommended methods to neutralize the threat posed on workplace diversity is by reiterating the ‘what’ and ‘why’ of DEI commitments on loop, so that the values of it will be drilled into the minds of people, beyond a mere superficial understanding.
To effectively promote DEI initiatives organizations should clarify how these commitments align with their core values and emphasize the benefits they bring to employees, customers, and stakeholders. It’s essential to address and counteract any statements like “I don’t know what diversity means” by providing context and understanding, rather than simply ignoring them. This proactive approach ensures that valuable efforts supporting core values and worker dignity are not dismissed prematurely.
Or the best way to ease people into diversity, like Karith Foster: the chief executive of Inversity Solutions, says in an article written by Jennifer Miller for The New York Times, is by blurring the binary of a villain and a victim. Foster is of the belief that an excessive emphasis on identity groups and using redundant terms such as the two mentioned above can deny agency from everyone and alienate them. Foster’s approach which starts from an alteration of the terminology itself where instead of saying ‘Diversity and Inclusion’, we should start saying ‘Diversity and Belonging’, allows employees to make mistakes, understand that they are essentially human, commit errors and also be self-aware enough to immediately correct them as well. Hopefully, these measures will allow workplaces to understand the importance of diversity not just because they create a positive impact on the numbers that they earn but also because it will help bridge the gap between people in general.
(Sandunlekha Ekanayake)