The pushback against DEI is complex and multifaceted, driven by psychological, political and organisational factors. Understanding these drivers is crucial for developing effective strategies to address resistance and implement meaningful DEI initiatives. We need to note though the diversity makeup, historical and social context. Priorities vary greatly across different regions.
Read more: Diversity and inclusion
So far, pushback has been strongest in the US, where DEI has become highly politicised, even leading to legislative action in some states. A number of companies have scaled back their DEI efforts, quoting reasons such as this, offered by Ford's CEO Jim Farley: “The external and legal environment related to political and social issues continues to evolve."
Ironically, despite DEI's roots in equal opportunity legislation and social movements, some people assert that DEI is discriminatory or gives preferential treatment to certain groups. DEI initiatives aim to provide equal opportunities for all by taking conscious steps to level the playing field, ensuring that everyone has a fair chance to develop and succeed.
Read more: Ten steps to prioritise D&I
Taking such conscious steps requires acknowledging that fairness hasn't always been the case: some of us may have enjoyed privileges and advantages simply because we were born into a particular race, ethnicity or gender. This can feel threatening, as most of us see ourselves as fair people who make decisions based purely on merit. Yet research shows that, despite our best intentions, we often make decisions influenced by unconscious biases.
This brings us to the argument that we should prioritise merit over DEI, assuming that the two are mutually exclusive. But promoting DEI right requires a mindset shift within organisations and across society as a whole. These changes take time, and early efforts can lead to extreme or unhelpful actions. For instance, cynically hiring or promoting 'diverse' candidates to reach quotas helps no one. We need to do the hard work of identifying a wider, more diverse qualified talent pool. Targets can help create a level playing field, but only if they are long term (10-plus years) to ensure that they can be met through inclusive practices without compromising merit.
Another pushback argument concerns unconscious bias training: some claim that it is ineffective or can even increase discrimination. This criticism has led to a proportion of organisations discontinuing the training; for example, in December 2020, the UK government decided to phase out unconscious bias training for civil servants.
Managing unconscious biases and developing new, inclusive habits indeed takes time. Early bias programmes often fell short by being too theoretical, addressing too many biases, being too brief, or being delivered in a 'blaming' manner, which created resentment. To be effective, we need consistent, long-term efforts, including practical unconscious bias programmes that offer everyday strategies for the workplace.
Read more: Diversity and inclusion: “Stay the course”
Finally, a significant underlying barrier to DEI initiatives – though not necessarily a pushback – is the general lack of clarity about what DEI involves and what individuals are expected to do. The focus should be on sharing practical actions for creating a more diverse workforce and developing inclusive habits to build more engaged, innovative, and effective organisations. DEI serves as the vehicle to achieve this business goal. Maintaining a focus on the positive impact of DEI on business outcomes should empower employees to implement best practices, so that even potential detractors can transform into active leaders and strong advocates of positive change.
By Dr Zsuzsanna Tungli, academic director, Building Diverse and Inclusive Teams, London Business School
