One could easily get the impression that corporate America is in full retreat from promoting diversity, equity and inclusion. Each news cycle seems to carry a headline about a rollback of diversity policies by another company, including Tractor Supply, Boeing, John Deere, Brown-Forman, Harley-Davidson, Lowe’s, Molson Coors, Ford, Toyota, Walmart, McDonald’s, Meta and, most recently, Target. Yet these programs aren’t dying; they’re morphing.

For starters, the “DEI in the dustbin” narrative is utterly unsupported by the data. The companies that have formally backed away from their diversity programs represent a tiny minority of corporate America. The conservative Heritage Foundation recently conceded that 486 out of the Fortune 500 still have inclusion statements or commitments on their websites. Multiple independent surveys published in 2024 have also found widespread support for, and ongoing commitment to, equity initiatives among corporate leaders.

This data jibes with our experience as scholars who study diversity, equity and inclusion. A vast majority of the hundreds of major organizations with which we have interacted over the last year or two are still deeply committed to these values. They are just doing the work more quietly and carefully than before, to avoid unwanted scrutiny and lawsuits.

Even the small proportion of companies that have formally announced a retreat from diversity initiatives are mostly not abandoning them wholesale. Ford’s memo stated that the company “remains deeply committed to fostering a safe and inclusive workplace” and to developing “a dealer body that reflects the communities they serve.”

The announcement by Lowe’s similarly doubled down on “fostering an environment where all individuals are welcomed, valued and respected,” observing that the company “mirrors the makeup of America and our customer base” thanks to “an inclusive search for talent.”

Even Walmart, which said it had phased out the term “DEI” from job titles and communications, noted that it still aims to “foster a sense of belonging, to open doors to opportunities for all our associates, customers and suppliers and to be a Walmart for everyone.” In their references to “inclusion” and “belonging,” these statements sure sound like DEI to us.

What’s actually happening is that most companies are shifting some language or practices while maintaining a commitment to the underlying project. Over the last couple of years, the pursuit of diversity has become more contested.

The Supreme Court’s June 2023 affirmative action decision unleashed a barrage of lawsuits against inclusion initiatives. Some activists have mounted public attacks on “woke” organizations, and some investors have tried to pressure public companies into abandoning diversity programs. And one of President Donald Trump’s recent executive orders signals that the federal government will soon investigate companies that have “illegal discrimination and preferences” in their diversity programs.

These developments have created legal and reputational risks that many businesses are understandably eager to mitigate — although others, such as Costco and Apple, use the spotlight to reaffirm their commitment to inclusion.

Yet even the corporations that appear to yield to pressure know that abandoning the goals of diversity, equity and inclusion would create new risks in the other direction, such as attacks by progressive activists and employees, difficulties hiring, and more lawsuits from traditional discrimination plaintiffs such as women, people of color and LGBTQ+ individuals.

They are also presumably aware that while most Americans oppose factoring race or ethnicity into hiring and promotion decisions, a majority supports diversity initiatives in general, especially when they are framed as being about opening doors and allowing all people to reach their potential.

Corporate America’s efforts to promote diversity, equity and inclusion arose to address real challenges, and those will only intensify in the years ahead. The United States is rapidly diversifying along lines of race and ethnicity. Women already make up a majority of the college-educated workforce. Nearly 30% of Gen Z adults identify as members of the LGBTQ+ community.

No organization can hope to succeed in this pluralistic environment unless it creates equal opportunity and provides employees the tools to navigate their differences with dignity and respect. And that points to why diversity initiatives have persisted for decades now in corporate America: They pay off.

But this isn’t the first time inclusion efforts have morphed in response to legal and political pressure. As the sociologist Frank Dobbin recounts in his book “Inventing Equal Opportunity,” the field of “diversity management” emerged after the Reagan administration’s attacks on affirmative action in the 1980s. Those attacks forced personnel professionals to rebrand their work using new language and different justifications. But the goals were unchanged. History is now repeating, as the field will continue to morph in response to attacks.

Given the reality that diversity initiatives are alive and well, why has the false narrative that they are “dead” or “dying” taken hold? We see at least three reasons.

First, opponents of inclusion programs are motivated to advance the narrative. If every corporate wording tweak can be portrayed as a death knell for diversity, that perception could create its own reality by persuading wavering or risk-averse leaders to abandon their organizations’ values.

Second, the public’s skewed perception reflects newsworthiness. As journalist Chris Hayes has pointed out, newsrooms don’t cover the planes that land, only the planes that crash. A major company withdrawing — or appearing to withdraw — from diversity efforts is simply more noteworthy than 486 out of 500 major companies quietly carrying on with the work they have been doing for years.

Third, and more speculatively, we believe the narrative helps some organizations find refuge at a time of swirling controversy. By appearing to retreat from diversity programs, they can get some vocal activists off their backs, avoiding a damaging social media campaign or a lawsuit. But within the privacy of their own walls, they can maintain the substance of most of their initiatives and reassure employees that their organizational commitment remains strong. Unless constituents who support diversity begin to substantively punish companies for public retreats, such dual messaging will be a viable choice for businesses.

This year and beyond, we expect more companies to release statements turning away from certain diversity, equity and inclusion practices and perhaps to jettison the “DEI” acronym altogether like Walmart. But when you encounter the next announcement of such a retreat, read it carefully. If the company’s “new approach” walks like DEI and quacks like DEI, it’s still DEI.

____

Kenji Yoshino and David Glasgow are the faculty director and executive director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging at New York University School of Law. They are co-authors of “Say the Right Thing: How to Talk About Identity, Diversity, and Justice.”

_____

©2025 Los Angeles Times. Visit at latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.