Corporations made commitments — through words, actions and resources — to recruit, retain and foster cultures in which racial and gender minorities could thrive
In recent years, leaders expanded their diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging (DEIB) programs in response to the overwhelming public support for social justice causes like #MeToo, #BLM and #StopAAPIHate. Corporations made commitments — through words, actions and resources — to recruit, retain and foster cultures in which racial and gender minorities could thrive.
Now, newly empowered chief diversity officers are forced to defend themselves amid political currents that have turned against them. Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard (2023), which ruled that race could not be used as a factor in university admissions, amplified the voices of critics decrying corporate DEIB efforts as ineffective, unfair or even illegal. Thirteen attorneys general issued a statement opposing corporate DEIB plans and warned corporate leaders to re-examine practices and eliminate quotas. Opposition to affirmative action and diversity goals is not new, but with an upcoming presidential election, politicians are positioning themselves as either for or against DEIB.
In the aftermath of SFFA, how should corporate leaders respond to the polarization surrounding DEIB? How can those seeking to create diverse, equitable and inclusive workspaces bring opposing sides into alignment?
Experience has taught us, as educators and DEIB professionals, that the answer lies in using a negotiation mindset. We challenge you to consider the various stakeholders in an organization as taking part in a multiparty, multi-issue negotiation regarding the meaning, direction and implementation of DEIB efforts.
[This article has been reproduced with permission from University Of Virginia's Darden School Of Business. This piece originally appeared on Darden Ideas to Action.]