Why companies are reneging on DEI - and how to cope as a diverse candidate

D.E.I. Diversity, equity, and inclusion. J.E.D.I Justice, diversity, equity, and inclusion. D.E.I.B diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging. Whatever you call it, DEI was an acronym created to represent the umbrella efforts for employee equity and organizational progress, particularly in bureaucratic organizations. Post-the aftermath of George Floyd’s death, companies pledged millions of dollars - hundred of millions - to the development of racial equity. George Floyd’s story, the video of his merciless death, and the #BlackLivesMatter marches all resulted in an outcry for more inclusivity across all factions of society - but particularly for those in corporate organizations. The “old boy’s club” could be dismantled once and for all - and DEI was supposed to be the engine that got it done. 

Organizations started pledging funds to create greater employee belonging and more improved outcomes for employees of color. For many of these companies - efforts were performative at best - a trend-driven bandaid fix that they could use to appease their stakeholders. A company’s internal organizational structure - and the news of their internal structure that reaches the press - affects their stock price. Stock prices are based on projections that are aligned with a company’s performance. How did they perform in the past, and how will they perform in the future? Scandals related to diversity - such as Timnit Gebru exposing Google’s algorithms for being racist - can directly affect how your stock is priced on the NASDAQ or S&P 500. Stock price declines result in disgruntled employees (with stock options), and investors. Companies followed suit because they didn’t want to deal with the financial consequences of not showing up.

This previews the “business case” that diversity, equity, and inclusion - as a discipline - was grounded upon. Statistics and reports that diverse companies perform better, that women-led countries did better during COVID, and that board diversity improves a company’s performance - pervaded the common discourse. You’re telling me that companies can perform better financially when diversity is prioritized? Say less. We had million dollar diversity programming initiated. Chief Diversity Officers hired. Millions of diversity, equity, and inclusion related consultancies are popping up around the country - and the world. Why wouldn’t they want to get involved? It was lucrative, with an estimated valuation of $23.4 billion in the global market by the year 2030. Even with the upside - there were downsides no one considered - such as the unpaid labor employees of color (and marginalized identities) take on within the workplace to advance diversity initiatives (can someone say, ERGs?) or the disillusionment that led to the rapid development of the DEI Industrial Complex - a series of inclusivity audits, consultations, and programs run with no clear evidence of moving the needle.

When Florida governor Ron DeSantis spearheaded a particular set of anti-DEI efforts, such as the removal of African American studies in school curriculums, and the disbandment of Black Greek organizations on Florida college campuses - Pandora’s box opened. The Supreme Court’s subsequent overturning of the affirmative action clause in the Harvard University vs. The SFFA case furthered the case for the removal of what was an “unnecessary evil” by some. The richest man in the world said “DEI must die” and referred to diversity practices as a form of discrimination. Another CEO proposed for DEI to be replaced by MEI - merit, excellence, and intelligence - to communicate that DEI opposed a meritocratic process; which was more fair and just for all employees - not just those with marginalized identities. Furthermore, attacks of intersectional (those acknowledging the layering of multiple identities) programming persisted, with Fearless Fund coming under fire for their Black female business grant program. While some have held onto the faith, it is clear that diversity, equity, and inclusion - as we once knew it - is on its last leg. 

Here’s what that means for your career:

Referrals will become more increasingly important when landing a job

The Supreme Court’s affirmative action - a sister law to the EEOC laws - will trickle down to corporate spaces as well. Employees who are referred are 4x more likely to get hired than those who don’t. USA Today also reports that White employees are more likely to get hired through referrals, proving the benefits of in-group affiliation and group economics. Employees of color can overcome this uneven playing field by pursuing referrals - building relationships with individuals who work at the companies you are interested in. They can also join diversity programs that foster talent in corporate America, such as the Executive Leadership Council, and leverage their corporate partnerships and organization partnerships to find that dream job. It’s time to get creative, and build that network power.

There will be less emphasis on employee belonging efforts

The Goldwater Institute referred to DEI programs as “wasteful, and unproductive.” In a worst case scenario, the company you work for might think the same way. There are two major factors involved in a successful career: 1) landing the right job and 2) being able to succeed once you get there. If ERGs, a tool for employee belonging and retention, are defunded, or in the case of X / Twitter - shut down - a key tool for employee success might be missing. This doesn’t mean you can’t build strong networks without them, but these groups made it easier to commune, share challenges, and create internal support networks. Think like referrals for promotions, priority for high visibility work projects, etc. the types of things that can make or break a corporate career. Employees will have to be more proactive in keeping that ERG Slack group going strong and even coordinating their own meetups off-site. 

You will have to be proactive about seeking out mentors and sponsors

I’m not a corporate “girlie” by any means - but I’ve been in enough bureaucratic spaces to know the importance of mentors and sponsors. For people of color, the right mentor or sponsor can open doors for you on their name recognition ALONE. This goes back to a fundamental DEI concept that often gets lost in translation - allyship. A cornerstone of many DEI programs was internal mentoring - making sure to match someone with a more senior employee who can directly understand their experience navigating their identity in a particular space. Traditional mentorship programs can leave critical gaps - they match people based on more superficial interests (similar alma mater, movies and hobbies). While those can be great things to build a rapport on, nothing beats someone who can speak directly to your sociological experience in a space. 

There will be less direct support for entrepreneurs of color

For many of us, the dream isn’t a corporate job forever, but to eventually break out and do our own thing. Entrepreneurship is central to the American spirit - and Gen Z and millennials - the largest portion of the workforce, are the most entrepreneurial generations in American history. However, for Black and brown founders - entrepreneurship continues to be an uphill battle, especially when competing in high-growth industries such as the technology sector. Black founders only claim 1% of available VC funding per year, and that rate of funding has rapidly declined since 2020 DEI pledges. Fearless Fund’s program - while controversial to some - was desperately needed. Black women are the fastest growing group of entrepreneurs. With more entrepreneurs the need for more support.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion still matters. There are companies and individuals who are doing the work - and we continue to salute them. This work might be under attack, but there is no sign that diversity, equity, and inclusion is over. In fact, the fight has only begun.