By Michael Stuber

Anti-woke boycott, perceived reverse discrimination, fragile business cases and misplaced identity politics: DEI work of past decades has contributed to multiple issues. Three strategies can overcome these challenges.
For more than three decades, the DEI journey knew only one direction: forwards, combined with growth. Our agenda has been mounting topics and tools, developed assessments and awards, and created new stakeholders and structures. As a result, many initiatives are now taken for granted – regardless of value-add – and evaluations look great, although positive scores often come from audiences who had always been convinced of DEI. Our analyses of the backlash of the past few years have revealed three critical gaps that need to be addressed in order to reframe DEI. I present them in more detail in my current “Rescue DEI Trilogy”on the KnowledgeBlog http://en.diversitymine.eu.
IMPACT GAPS
A current study suggests that the most wide-spread DEI programmes are actually counterproductive (!) to making progress. The analysis of big data identified the prevalence of 16 common DEI practices and their impact on the representation of diverse groups in management. Scientists note that all ineffective practices were at the same time frequently implemented while the effective ones are less often realized. While I have shared a number of critical aspects of the study it must be considered as another wake-up call to question the impact (and contribution) of DEI initiatives, in particular those we consider to be core, standard, good or best practices. Evaluations might reveal that some ongoing investment is still relevant as a charitable or philanthropy activity.
“Doing a lot for DEI created noise, doing smart things supports valuable change.”
ENGAGEMENT GAPS
A different discrepancy, yet related to the above, is the involvement of stakeholders in DEI. Some initiatives were (rightfully) geared at previously marginalised groups by design while over time, all programmes claimed to welcome everyone. On the other hand, some DEI tools targeted people who had not yet fully embraced the relevance, necessity and value of more inclusive practices. The current bottom line, however, is that we see camps of people that regularly engage in DEI activities and others who only participate when they are encouraged to do so. This has undermined the relevance of DEI which is underscored by, e.g., a current study of HR trends that identifies twelve key future topics and does not mention DEI anywhere. We see a clear need to rethink the design, messaging and outreach of our work regarding audiences beyond the traditional grouping. Instead we must aim at creating relevance for both the business and the people.
“Asking the right questions is key to uncovering issues with broader relevance.”
LEADERSHIP GAPS
One key to engagement and impact has always been to have DEI be led from the top. Over decades, the C-suite and senior executives delivered speeches, produced video statements and participated in events to show their support. As DEI was politicised, some pulled out (to keep away from politics) while others are using DEI to reconfirm and illustrate their corporate values (like integrity, curiosity, respect, innovation, teamwork or trust) or their business interest (e.g., talent management or globality). Within companies leaders with a personal connection to DEI are most likely to be active stakeholders while the vast majority does not see the why nor the how to embed DEI in their business routines or leadership behaviour. These leadership gaps must urgently be addressed to connect DEI in a new way to business priorities and everyday management practice.
“Effectively integrating DEI in leadership is key to future success in a complex world.”
WHERE TO START
Similar to all advanced DEI questions, there is not one solution in the current situation. Your industry and geographical context can inform your next steps as can the DEI maturity of your organisation. The strongest guidance, however, may come from the one item that makes your organisation unique: the corporate culture including all your accumulated history and implicit assumptions. The combined consideration of these aspects can tell you if an impact review, an engagement revamp or a leadership re-alignment is most promising. Several synchronised steps are usually most effective. My experience shows that each of the entry points can create step change as they will touch the fundamentals of the current approach. This, however, is often not appreciated by DEI leaders who might have become used to – and comfortable – with their approach. Some might even think about starting an ISO-based assessment or plan more event or training series. This will for sure increase the already hefty backlash.
THE IMPORTANCE OF THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX
As DEI experts we have been talking about the need to step out of one’s comfort zone, especially in difficult situations or crises. Now is the time for us to do exactly this: Be ready to unlearn and pursue new approaches. Only then we can expect different reactions – and renewed support.
Michael Stuber
Michael Stuber is The Global D&I Engineer with a European identity. He combines critical analyses and impact research to create context-relevant strategies and broad engagement. He has authored 5 books and hundreds of contributions, including for PDJ.