The Future of Work: What went wrong with DEI and how to move forward

DEI has become polarised because it challenges existing power structures, says Felita Harris, co-founder of non-profit Raisefashion, which supports BIPOC designers. “When people argue that DEI undermines merit-based decisions, they are misrepresenting the purpose of equity and ignoring the structural barriers that have historically dictated who even gets the opportunity to compete on merit in the first place,” she says. “It’s not about compensating for a deficiency, these programmes and resources exist because a system was built to exclude certain groups from access while others have advanced without facing those same structural barriers.” Harris adds that systemic barriers have been in place for so long and that we haven’t given DEI enough time to “course correct hundreds of years of inequity”.

Widespread ineffective approaches to DEI have also played a role in the eventual backlash against the cause. “DEI was always piecemealed together, there wasn’t clarity or technical rigour,” says Jamie Gill, founder of talent incubator The Outsiders Perspective. At worst, some companies have taken shortcuts to DEI: instead of doing the work to develop a talent pipeline, they have made tokenistic “diversity hires”, which improve the appearance of diversity but have harmed not just the people involved, but the cause itself, experts say.

Many people from historically dominant or privileged groups have felt alienated by DEI. “Some conversations about DEI have been centred in a way that’s made particular groups feel like they are the problem and that we don’t all have an opportunity to be part of the solution,” says Daniel Peters, founder of consultancy Fashion Minority Report.

“The problem with [the typical approach to DEI] is that we’ve put people in siloes and pitted groups against each other in a zero-sum mentality, and that’s why you’re seeing reverse discrimination claims,” adds Hebbar.

Now, there’s an opportunity to “invite more people to the table to reflect on what they’d like to see from their workplace culture and to be part of the conversation”, Peters says. “Every single one of us at some point in our lives will find ourselves in a vulnerable or underrepresented category, whether it’s disability, a loved one facing discrimination, healthcare access, ageism, economic instability,” Harris says.

If everyone feels included within DEI, there’s a greater chance that it will stay on the agenda. “DEI sits so closely with pay, benefits, employee well-being and company values. If inclusion is for everyone, then it should benefit you and enhance culture for the greater workforce,” says Gill.

Where do we go from here?

In the short term, one of the easiest ways companies are changing their approaches to DEI is simply by renaming the function, like Victoria’s Secret did, to something along the lines of people and culture, belonging, employee engagement or workplace community. “Renaming DEI helps diffuse the tension surrounding it, allowing leaders to focus on the actual people and work involved, rather than getting bogged down by highly politicised and high-stakes wording,” says Marra. On the other hand, experts agree that simply changing the name of the programme won’t fix any fundamental issues that underlie the approach.