Sarah Green Carmichael: DEI work is hard -- but not hopeless -- right now
Published in Op Eds
“Shock and awe” is President Donald Trump’s strategy for his first 100 days. Where his early orders on diversity, equity and inclusion are concerned, he achieved half a victory: They are awful, but not shocking.
It was all previewed in Project 2025, DEI experts tell me, referring to the far-right blueprint for a second Trump term that he disavowed during his campaign. So they were not surprised by his move to ban DEI at federal government agencies and contractors or even the demand that government workers snitch on each other and report suspected violations.
But they were devastated; infuriated; heartbroken. There’s also a deep sense of frustration with how completely DEI has been rebranded by anti-diversity activists as anti-White, anti-male discrimination.
Of course, that’s not what DEI is. These programs seek to address documented disparities in organizations — for example, a problem retaining high-potential female employees, or an advancement gap facing Hispanic and Black engineers.
They include creating flexible work programs for people with disabilities; creating guidelines for internship programs so that non-nepobabies have a fair shot; ensuring that veterans aren’t passed over for jobs because their resumes don’t contain the right civilian keywords. They even include some apprenticeship programs aimed at hiring men without college degrees — one of Trump’s most loyal demographics.
The whole purpose of programs to mitigate bias in hiring, says Joelle Emerson, CEO of culture and inclusion platform Paradigm, “is so we can have a more merit-based hiring process for the people who are actually the best, not the ones who knew the manager or went to the same school as the founder.”
All of that is now at risk thanks to Trump’s new orders — though the details remain unclear; right now, even diversity experts have more questions than answers. One business school academic told me she was scheduled to teach a course for female executives. Is that still allowed at universities that, as nearly all do, accept federal funds? Other experts worried about the future of corporate benefits aimed at women, like paid maternity leave or egg-freezing.
One manager I spoke with — who doesn’t work in DEI, but whose team had to spend a whole day tearfully deleting “naughty words” like “women in leadership” and “indigenous” from the organization’s website — expressed bewilderment at why this order should supersede the actual work his team was doing.
The bafflement even extends to the military: The Air Force immediately suspended — then rapidly reinstated — a training class featuring a video that tells the story of the Tuskegee Airmen, the all-Black force that fought Nazis in World War II, when segregation was legal in the U.S.
This uncertainty seems to exist by design. As Bloomberg News reported, “the order didn’t provide a definition of what a DEI program is, nor did it say what it believes is unlawful.” If no one knows what is considered “illegal DEI,” they can’t ever be entirely sure they’re on the right side of the law.
The confusion and threats of “adverse consequences” are creating a climate of fear, which is surely another of Trump’s goals. The executive branch’s directive to find “up to nine” companies, universities or nonprofits engaging in illegal practices is surely also designed to have a chilling effect.
Most companies seem to be waiting for the dust to settle and clarity to emerge. But the Trump administration is unlikely to offer any. And the experts I spoke with emphasized that companies running away from DEI efforts leave themselves vulnerable to another type of risk: discrimination lawsuits.
Rather than stay frozen in DEI purgatory, corporate leaders need to find a way to keep moving forward. They can start by keeping the long view in mind. Corporate diversity efforts have been around for over 40 years, says Ella Washington, a professor at Georgetown University. “This is not the first time the pendulum has swung, and it won’t be the last.”
Leaders should let people know they have their backs. Rank-and-file employees, middle managers and those who work directly on diversity initiatives are feeling abandoned. They need some kind of reassurance — and some message to deliver to their own staffers.
Executives don’t have to have all the answers, but they should let people know they are working on a game plan, and that they are committed to a workplace that is fair, recruits the best workers of all backgrounds, and allows all types of people to do good work.
This is also a good time to separate the effective programs from the chaff. If there are diversity programs that haven’t revealed any positive impact, those probably aren’t worth saving. Keep the initiatives that have shown good return on investment.
Revise policies to be demographic-neutral. Offer parental leave, to be taken by a primary caregiver, as opposed to only maternity leave; offer flexible work for those with demonstrated needs, not only for mothers or workers with disabilities. Employee resource groups for, say, LGBT employees or Black employees should be open to all those interested, not only members of the group. DEI practitioners have been saying this for years, by the way; this would be a good time to start listening.
Finally, articulate the business reasons for diversity initiatives. Historically, if a company implemented a new diversity initiative, it would not necessarily explain why. Admitting, for instance, that Asian Americans left the business at twice the rate of White employees was considered tantamount to inviting a lawsuit. These days, leaders need to provide a clear rationale for programs aimed at any specific group.
Trump may have sown confusion and fear with his executive orders. But corporate leaders can still act with clarity and conviction.
_____
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Sarah Green Carmichael is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist and editor. Previously, she was an executive editor at Harvard Business Review.
_____
©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com/opinion. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Comments