Companies rushed to adopt diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs in the wake of social justice movements in 2020. But after a recent wave of tech layoffs and a flurry of anti-DEI lawsuits and legal threats, much of the enthusiasm for those initiatives has dissipated.
As a sign of DEI’s fading influence, the Society for Human Resources Management — or SHRM, the leading HR professional association with more than 300,000 members — has decided to remove “equity” (the “E” in DEI) in its own acronym when referring to workplace diversity programs on its website and in its training and certification programs.
SHRM has facilitated countless conversations about DEI over the years, so the shift from IE&D to I&D sent shockwaves through its audience of HR professionals. Within two days, a LinkedIn post announcing the change garnered nearly 900 comments — many of them from HR professionals who felt like their industry voice had given up on the fight for more equitable workplaces.
“I felt like we were kind of at odds with our own organization,” Morgan Williams, co-founder and CEO of fractional HR consulting firm PeakHR, told Built In.
“I felt like we were kind of at odds with our own organization.”
One group, the Equitable HR Guild, has circulated a petition encouraging HR professionals to boycott SHRM by letting their certifications expire and not attending SHRM events. The petition garnered more than 500 signatures within the first five days.
For its part, SHRM said it remains “steadfast” in its push for equity, which it noted will be integrated into the broader framework of inclusion. “By emphasizing Inclusion-first, we aim to address the current shortcomings of DE&I programs, which have led to societal backlash and increasing polarization,” the SHRM LinkedIn post said.
Joelle Emerson, founder and CEO of DEI consultancy Paradigm, told Built In she was less concerned about the changing acronym — many companies use different acronyms to highlight their unique organizational values — than she was about SHRM’s apparent characterization of DEI programs.
“To place all blame on polarization on ‘DE&I programs,’ and none on anti-diversity activists intent on dismantling every component of this work, is not just offensive to people who do this work, it calls into question the credibility and awareness of the organization,” Emerson said.
The DEI Fallout, Explained
SHRM CEO Johnny Taylor told The Guardian in December 2023 that DEI was going to “come under full-out attack in 2024,” and that companies have started moving away from it.
Indeed, DEI efforts have come under fire since a June 2023 Supreme Court ruling that barred race-conscious college admissions policies. And while workplace DEI programs were not impacted by the ruling, conservative politicians and activists have tried to capitalize on its momentum. More than 30 states have introduced or passed anti-DEI legislation, and Republican attorneys general have warned companies about the legal risk of DEI initiatives, causing at least six major companies to modify their DEI policies.
Conservative activist Edward Blum sued three law firms over their diversity fellowship programs, prompting them to change their eligibility guidelines. Another activist law firm, America First Legal, filed more than 30 EEOC complaints alleging discriminatory hiring practices at IBM, Morgan Stanley and other Fortune 500 companies.
This anti-DEI push comes amid tech industry layoffs that disproportionately affect DEI roles. In short order, the companies that had announced sweeping DEI initiatives in 2020 had quietly scaled back or eliminated that programming.
A New York Times report found the number of DEI roles on ZipRecruiter fell 63 percent in 2023. Microsoft, Zoom and Google are among the big tech companies that have made cuts to their DEI teams in the last year.
A 2024 survey by Culture Amp, an employee feedback platform, found that the number of companies with DEI leadership roles dropped from 56 percent in 2021 to 41 percent in 2023. The number of companies hiring DEI consultants dropped from 66 percent to 47 percent in that same time period.
According to Williams, the head of the fractional HR consulting firm, many of the DEI practitioners hired in 2021 were set up for failure, as they were not given enough budget or authority within the organization to make much of an impact.
“They never were allowed to really lead,” Williams said. “A lot of it was almost like propaganda, or just putting a face out there. But they actually couldn’t do the work.”
The Future of Equity
The concept of equity became a popular addition to corporate America’s diversity and inclusion efforts within the past decade. It was part of an effort to recognize that systemic inequalities disadvantage some groups of workers, and that companies have a responsibility to remove those barriers, leveling the playing field so that people from all demographics have equal access to opportunity.
Some organizations worked toward this by becoming transparent about salary structures, or by offering remote and flexible work accommodations to meet the needs of parents, caretakers and employees with disabilities. They also tried to diversify their applicant pool by writing inclusive job descriptions and forming partnerships with professional associations for underrepresented employees.
Even so, Alex Suggs, co-founder of DEI consulting firm Different DEI, said equity is often misunderstood, causing a backlash that has prevented DEI efforts from being more effective.
“Equity is what makes DEI effective, period.”
“Some DEI naysayers believe that equity is giving some groups an unfair and undeserved advantage, rather than recognizing it as the very thing that is seeking to rectify the advantages that have favored some groups over others for decades,” Suggs told Built In.
Proponents of DEI maintain that, when a company has established an equitable environment, it will attract and retain diverse employees. And that without equitable policies in place, companies will have a hard time nurturing a sense of inclusion or belonging among employees from underrepresented groups.
“Employees are far more likely to feel included when they have equitable opportunities to develop, gain recognition, obtain inclusive benefits and advance within an organization,” Suggs said.
Addressing systemic inequity can be uncomfortable and contentious, but Williams said the work of HR has always been unpopular as it attempts to balance C-suite priorities against the needs of employees.
“So much of what we do doesn’t make everybody happy, but that’s also not why we do it,” Williams added. “We have to tell the hard truths. We have to have the hard conversations.”
Without those difficult conversations, Suggs said, organizations may treat employees equally — but they will never be equitable.
“Equity is what makes DEI effective, period,” Suggs said. “Equity is the means to achieve eventual equality — equality which we don’t yet have in our workplaces, in our communities and in our institutions.”
Whether SHRM’s choice in acronym has any real-world impact on equity initiatives remains to be seen. But if the recent discourse is any indication, it may prompt a more existential conversation around the objectives of DEI programs, how they are measured and how they are talked about in boardrooms across the country.
