Flyer supporting equity, diversity and inclusion. (2016)

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (usually abbreviated DEI) are organizational frameworks which seek to promote "the fair treatment and full participation of all people", particularly groups "who have historically been underrepresented or subject to discrimination" on the basis of identity or disability.[1] These three notions (diversity, equity, and inclusion) together represent "three closely linked values" which organizations seek to institutionalize through DEI frameworks.[2] Some experts say diversity and inclusion should be decoupled in some cases.[3] Some frameworks, primarily in Britain, substitute the notion of "equity" with equality: equality, diversity, inclusion (EDI).[4][5][6] Other variations include diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging (DEIB),[7][8][9] justice, equity, diversity and inclusion (JEDI or EDIJ),[10][11] or diversity, equity, inclusion and access (IDEA, DEIA or DEAI).[12][13][14]

Diversity refers to the presence of variety within the organizational workforce, such as in identity and identity politics. It includes gender, culture, ethnicity, religion, disability, class etc.), age or opinion.[2][15] Equity refers to concepts of fairness and justice, such as fair compensation and substantive equality.[15] More specifically, equity usually also includes a focus on societal disparities and allocating resources and "decision making authority to groups that have historically been disadvantaged",[16] and taking "into consideration a person's unique circumstances, adjusting treatment accordingly so that the end result is equal."[2] Finally, inclusion refers to creating an organizational culture that creates an experience where "all employees feel their voices will be heard",[2] and a sense of belonging and integration.[15][17]

DEI is most often used to describe certain "training" efforts, such as diversity training. Though DEI is best known as a form of corporate training, it also finds implementation within many types of organizations, such as within academia, schools, and hospitals.[18][19]

In recent years, DEI efforts and policies have generated criticism, some directed at the specific effectiveness of its tools, such as diversity training, its effect on free speech and academic freedom, as well as more broadly attracting criticism on political or philosophical grounds.

History

Further information: Multicultural and diversity management

DEI policy emerged from Affirmative Action in the United States.[20] The legal term "affirmative action" was first used in "Executive Order No. 10925",[21] signed by President John F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated [fairly] during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin".[22] It was used to promote actions that achieve non-discrimination. In September 1965, President Lyndon Johnson issued Executive Order 11246 which required government employers to "hire without regard to race, religion and national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin."[23] The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Neither executive order nor The Civil Rights Act authorized group preferences. The Senate floor manager of the bill, Senator Hubert Humphrey, declared that the bill “would prohibit preferential treatment for any particular group” adding “I will eat my hat if this leads to racial quotas.” [24] However affirmative action in practice would eventually become synonymous with preferences, goals and quotas as upheld or struck down by Supreme Court decisions even though no law had been passed explicitly permitting discrimination in favor of disadvantaged groups. Some state laws explicitly banned racial preferences, and in response some laws have failed attempting to explicitly legalize race preferences.

Affirmative action is intended to alleviate under-representation and to promote the opportunities of defined minority groups within a society to give them equal access to that of the majority population.[25] The philosophical basis of the policy has various rationales, including but not limited to compensation for past discrimination, correction of current discrimination, and the diversification of society.[26] It is often implemented in governmental and educational settings to ensure that designated groups within a society can participate in all promotional, educational, and training opportunities.[27]

The stated justification for affirmative action by its proponents is to help compensate for past discrimination, persecution or exploitation by the ruling class of a culture,[28] and to address existing discrimination.[29] More recently concepts have moved beyond discrimination to include diversity, equity and inclusion as motives for preferring historically underrepresented groups.

In the famous Bakke decision of 1978, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, diversity now became a factor in constitutional law. The Supreme Court ruled quotas were illegal but it was allowable to consider race as a plus factor when trying to foster "diversity" in their classes.[30] [31]

Diversity themes gained momentum in the mid-1980s. At a time when President Ronald Reagan threatened to dismantle equality and affirmative action laws in the 1980s, equality and affirmative action professionals employed by US firms along with equality consultants, engaged in establishing the argument that a diverse workforce should be seen as a competitive advantage rather than just as a legal constraint. Basically, their message was, do not promote diversity because it is a legal mandate, but because it is good for business . From then on, researchers started to test a number of hypotheses on the business benefits of diversity and of diversity management, known as the business case of diversity.[32]

The presence of multicultural and diversity management in the workplace has been depicted as the existence of conceptual and operational policies and programs within the organizations that ensure that the various groups that exist in the societal spectrum are able to effectively participate in the various levels that exist in the organizations.[33]

In 2003 corporations spent $8 billion annually on diversity. After the election of Donald Trump in 2016 and the ascent of the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements, Time magazine stated in 2019 that the DEI industry had "exploded" in size.[34] Within academia, a 2019 survey found that spending on DEI efforts had increased 27 percent over the five preceding academic years.[35]

One 2020 estimate placed the size of the global diversity and inclusion market at $7.5 billion, of which $3.4 billion was in the United States, projecting it to reach $17.2 billion by 2027.[36] DEI is more common than D&I, and represents many different methodologies.

In 2021, New York magazine stated "the business became astronomically larger than ever" after the murder of George Floyd in May 2020.[37] The Economist has also stated that surveys of international companies indicate that the number of people hired for jobs with "diversity" or "inclusion" in the title more than quadrupled since 2010.[38]

As of 2024, affirmative action rhetoric has been increasingly replaced by emphasis on Diversity, equity, and inclusion, and nine states explicitly ban its use in the employment process.[39][40] The Supreme Court in 2023 explicitly rejected affirmative action regarding race in college admissions in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. The Court held that affirmative action programs "lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points. We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today".[41][42][43]

Methods and arguments

Further information: Diversity (business), Diversity education, Equity in education, Inclusion (education), and Inclusion (disability rights)

In a 2018 article, proponents of DEI argued that because businesses and corporations exist within a larger world, they cannot be completely separated from the issues that exist in society. Therefore, the authors argue the need for DEI to improve coworker relations and teamwork.[44] Through a DEI plan, organizations outline measures to be taken, including recruiting and retaining personnel, fostering effective communication channels, imparting relevant training, and regulating workplace conduct.[45]

As of 2022 many academic institutions in the US have also started making commitments to DEI in different ways, including creating documents, programs and appointing dedicated staff members especially in the US.[46][47] Many accreditation agencies now require supporting DEI.[48][49] As of 2014, information on DEI for both students and professors was widespread in colleges and universities, with many schools requiring training and meetings on the topic. Many scholarships and opportunities at universities even have a secondary purpose of encouraging diversity. Diversity in higher education can be difficult, with diverse students often feeling reduced to fulfilling a 'diversity quota,' which can carry a high emotional tax.[50]

Within healthcare, DEI reflective groups have been used to enhance the cultural sensitivity within mental health professionals. Such reflective spaces help improve mental health professionals reflexivity and awareness of DEI-related issues both within direct clinical work with clients, their families, and wider systems, as well as within professional supervision and teams.[51]

DEI positions also exist with the goal of creating allies for public school students through resources and staff training, in order to support students facing social disparities.[52][53] Other proponents of allyship consider impromptu speaking a key skill for allies to operate on authenticity in everyday words and reactions.[54]

Criticism and controversy

According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, institutions are making defensive adjustments to the criticism. Some schools are removing the word “diversity” from titles of offices and jobs; some are closing campus spaces set up for students according to identity; some are ending diversity training; and some have stopped asking all faculty and staff members for written affirmations of their commitment to diversity.[55]

Diversity training

Further information: Diversity training

Diversity training, a common tool used in DEI efforts, has repeatedly come under criticism as being ineffective or even counterproductive.[56][38][57][58] The Economist has stated that "the consensus now emerging among academics is that many anti-discrimination policies have no effect. What is worse, they often backfire".[38] A regular claim is that these efforts mainly work to protect against litigation.[38][59] It has also been criticized that there has been limited progress in achieving racial diversity in corporate leadership, particularly for Black professionals, due to a lack of diverse Chief Diversity Officers and a broad DEI focus that overlooks specific issues Black professionals face.[60] A 2007 study of 829 companies over 31 years showed "no positive effects in the average workplace" from diversity training, while the effect was negative where it was mandatory.[59] According to Harvard University professor in sociology and diversity researcher Frank Dobbin, "[o]n average, the typical all-hands-on-deck, 'everybody has to have diversity training' – that typical format in big companies doesn't have any positive effects on any historically underrepresented groups like black men or women, Hispanic men or women, Asian-American men or women or white women."[57]

Mandatory diversity statements within academia

The use of mandatory "diversity statements" within academia, wherein an applicant or faculty member outlines their "past contributions" and plans "for advancing diversity, equity and inclusion" if hired, has become controversial and sparked criticism.[61] The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has called such practices an attack on academic freedom, stating that "[v]ague or ideologically motivated DEI statement policies can too easily function as litmus tests for adherence to prevailing ideological views on DEI" and "penalize faculty for holding dissenting opinions on matters of public concern".[62] According to a 2022 survey conducted by the American Association of University Professors, one in five American colleges and universities include DEI criteria in tenure standards, including 45.6 percent of institutions with more than 5000 students.[63] Some universities have begun to weigh diversity statements heavily in hiring processes; for example, University of California, Berkeley eliminated three-quarters of applicants for five faculty positions in the life sciences exclusively on the basis of their diversity statements, in the hiring cycle of 2018–2019.[64]

The Academic Freedom Alliance (AFA) has called for the end of required diversity statements, stating it "encourages cynicism and dishonesty" and erases "the distinction between academic expertise and ideological conformity".[65] Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, who resigned from the SPSP in protest against mandatory diversity statements, has stated that "most academic work has nothing to do with diversity, so these mandatory statements force many academics to betray their quasi-fiduciary duty to the truth by spinning, twisting, or otherwise inventing some tenuous connection to diversity".[66] Other criticisms include that it "devalues merit", is connected to affirmative action, that it violates the First Amendment, or function as loyalty oaths.[61][67][68]

A 1500-person survey conducted by FIRE reported that the issue is highly polarizing for faculty members, with half saying their view more closely aligns with the description of diversity statements as "a justifiable requirement for a job at a university", while the other half saw it as "an ideological litmus test that violates academic freedom".[69]

Several U.S. states have implemented legislation to ban mandatory diversity statements.[69]

Equity versus equality

According to DEI frameworks, "equity is different than equality in that equality implies treating everyone as if their experiences are exactly the same."[70][71] A common identification, especially among critics, is of equality as meaning "equality of opportunities" and equity as "equality of outcome".[72][73] Some have criticized this focus on equity rather than equality, arguing that the former runs contrary to a focus on merit or non-discrimination. Political scientist Charles Lipson has called "equity" a "mandate to discriminate", threatening the principle of "equality under the law",[74] while Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, a frequent critic of DEI, has called equity "the most egregious, self-righteous, historically-ignorant and dangerous" of the three titular notions of DEI.[75] The debate has also branched into the realm of politics. Commenting on Governor of Texas Greg Abbott calling DEI initiatives "illegal", a spokesperson for his office stated "[t]he issue is not diversity — the issue is that equity is not equality. Here in Texas, we give people a chance to advance based on talent and merit".[15]


Effects of DEI policies on free speech and academic freedom

In recent years, high-profile incidents of campus conflict have sparked debate about the effect of DEI on the campus environment, academic freedom and free speech.[76][77][78]

The 2021 cancelling of an MIT guest lecture by astrophysicist Dorian Abbot after he criticized DEI programs led to media attention and controversy.[79][80][81] As a result, MIT empaneled a committee to investigate the state of academic freedom at the university.[81]

The 2023 disruption of a talk by Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Kyle Duncan at Stanford Law School sparked criticism and discussion in the media, with many focusing on the role of Associate DEI Dean Tirien Steinbach, who joined protesters in denouncing Duncan's presence on campus.[82][83][84] In the wake of the incident, the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal opined that DEI offices have "become weapons to intimidate and limit speech".[85] Steinbach replied with "Diversity and Free Speech Can Coexist at Stanford", published in the Journal the following week.[86][87] Dean of Stanford Law School, Jenny S. Martínez, also published a ten-page document addressing the situation and clarifying Stanford's position on free speech. In it, Martinez stated that the university's commitment to DEI "can and should be implemented in ways that are consistent with its commitment to academic freedom and free speech" and that she believed that "the commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion actually means that we must protect free expression of all views."[88] She added that the commitment would not take the form of "having the school administration announce institutional positions on a wide range of current social and political issues, make frequent institutional statements about current news events, or exclude or condemn speakers who hold views on social and political issues with whom some or even many in our community disagree", criticizing this definition of an "inclusive environment" by stating it "can lead to creating and enforcing an institutional orthodoxy."[88]

In April 2023, a group of 29 scientists, including Nobel laureates Dan Shechtman and Arieh Warshel, published a paper which outlined what the authors see as a "clash in science between classical liberal values" and a "new postmodern worldview", which, they argue, is "enforced by 'Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion' (DEI) officers and bureaucracies" and "threatens the entire scientific enterprise."[89] Two of the authors, Anna Krylov and Jerry Coyne, subsequently argued in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that their emphasis on merit – "once anodyne and unobjectionable [...] now contentious and outré, even in the hard sciences" – led to its refusal by major journals and subsequent publication in the Journal of Controversial Ideas.[90]

The 2023 suicide of former Toronto principal Richard Bilkszto led to a new wave of controversy surrounding DEI in the workplace and its impact on freedom of expression.[91][92] Bilkszto had earlier filed a lawsuit against the Toronto District School Board in the wake of a 2021 incident at a DEI training seminar; Bilkszto was later diagnosed with "anxiety secondary to a workplace event", and claimed the session and its aftermath had destroyed his reputation. Bilkszto's lawyer has publicly linked this incident and its aftermath with his death.[91][92] In the wake of Bilkszto's death, Ontario minister of education, Stephen Lecce, stated he had asked for a review and "options to reform professional training and strengthen accountability on school boards so this never happens again", calling Bilkszto's allegations before his death "serious and disturbing".[91] Bilkszto's death generated international attention and renewed debate on DEI and freedom of speech.[93][94] According to The Globe and Mail, the incident has also been "seized on by a number of prominent right-wing commentators looking to roll-back [DEI] initiatives."[92] The anti-racism trainer involved in the incident has stated they welcome the review by Lecce, and stated that the incident has been "weaponized to discredit and suppress the work of people committed [to DEI]".[91][92]

Antisemitism

DEI has been accused of ignoring or even contributing to antisemitism.[95][96][97][98] According to Andria Spindel, of the Canadian Antisemitism Education Foundation, antisemitism has been largely ignored in the DEI curriculum.[99] The relationship between DEI and campus antisemitism came under further scrunity after the 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, and the subsequent war in Gaza.[100][101][102]

Tabia Lee, a former DEI director at De Anza College in California turned critic, has claimed that DEI frameworks foster antisemitism due to its "oppressors and the oppressed" dichotomy where "Jews are categorically placed in the oppressor category" and described as "white oppressors".[103][104] She has claimed that her attempts to include Jews under the "DEI" umbrella was resisted.[105] When her critics asked the college trustees to oust her from her role, one counselor explicitly referenced her attempts to place Jewish students "on the same footing as marginalized groups".[105] The Brandeis Center likewise notes how the DEI committee at Stanford University alleged that "Jews, unlike other minority group[s], possess privilege and power, Jews and victims of Jew-hatred do not merit or necessitate the attention of the DEI committee", after two students complained about antisemitic incidents on campus.[106]

Following a wake of antisemitic incidents on American campuses in 2023, several Republican congressmen laid the blame at DEI, with Burgess Owens stating DEI programs "are anything but inclusive for Jews".[107] DEI's lack of inclusion for Jews, and contribution to fueling antisemitism, was similarly criticized by businessman Bill Ackman,[108] and columnist Heather Mac Donald.[109] Following the antisemitism controversy at the University of Pennsylvania, one donor pulled a $100 million donation "because he thought the school was prioritizing D.E.I. over enhancing the business school's academic excellence."[110]

Politicization and ideology

DEI has according to some critics become a distinct ideology or "political agenda", leading to a politicization of universities.[111] CNN's Fareed Zakaria has criticized American universities for "[h]aving gone so far down the ideological path", that "these universities and these presidents cannot make the case clearly that at the center of a university is the free expression of ideas", opining that "[t]he most obvious lack of diversity at universities, political diversity, which clearly affects their ability to analyze many issues, is not addressed".[111]

Dog-whistle diversity

Author Christine Michel Carter coined the term "dog-whistle diversity" for TIME in 2017.[112] Influenced by the phrase dog whistle politics, dog whistle diversity is defined as the hiring of groups who have historically been underrepresented or subject to discrimination by organizations for the social aspect of environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG). To investors and stakeholders, hiring these groups sends a coded message that the organization is more open to a diverse workforce, but to the groups hired it suggests the organization lacks effective diversity management or inclusion.[112]

Disability community

According to some critics, DEI initiatives inadvertently sideline disabled people. Writing for The Conversation in 2017, college professor Stephen Friedman said that "organizations who are serious about DEI must adopt the frame of producing shared value where business and social goods exist side-by-side".[113] According to a Time article in 2023, "people with disabilities are being neglected".[114]

This view has been echoed by a number of DEI leaders and activists. Sara Hart Weir, the former president and CEO of the National Down Syndrome Society, and co-founder of the Commission for Disability Employment, argues that when deliberating on the vision of DEI success in the United States, policymakers and employers need to take proactive measures to engaging with people with disabilities who they historically ignored.[115] Corinne Gray has argured that "if you embrace diversity, but ignore disability, you're doing it wrong."[116]

Political and public reaction

Corporate

Main article: Diversity (business)

Following the murder of George Floyd in 2020, companies made substantial commitments to racial equity by establishing dedicated diversity, equity, and inclusion teams. In early 2024 the Washington Post reported that there is a trend in corporate America to reduce DEI positions and delegate the work to external consultants. The number of DEI jobs reached its highest point in early 2023, but subsequently decreased by 5 percent that year and has further shrunk by 8 percent in 2024. The attrition rate for DEI roles has been approximately twice as high as that of non-DEI positions. The scaling back of DEI initiatives has aligned with a rise in legal challenges and political opposition to systematic endeavors aimed at enhancing racial equity.[117]

Higher education

Since 2023, state Republican-dominated state legislatures are considering bills that are against DEI efforts, primarily at state colleges and universities. The downgrading is taking place amid heavy legal pressures. Supreme Court in June 2023 upended established equal protection law with its decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. This ruling, effectively eliminated the use of affirmative action in college admissions but did not directly affect employers. Nevertheless, since then conservative activists have organized in the states to dismantle race-conscious policies in various aspects of the economy. The Chronicle of Higher Education in February 2024 is tracking 73 bills introduced in state legislatures in 2023-2024. Of these 8 have become law, 25 failed to pass, and the rest are pending. Two bills became law in Florida and Texas; and one each in North Carolina, North Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah. Florida now prohibits public colleges from requiring “political loyalty tests” as a condition of employment, admission, or promotion. The other Florida law prohibits public colleges from spending state or federal funds on DEI unless required by federal law. One Texas law prohibits DEI practices or programs, including training, that are not in compliance with the state Constitution regarding equality. The other law bans DEI offices and staff, as well as mandatory diversity training. It also bans identity-based diversity statements that give preference regarding race or sex. [118]

Entertainment and media

Within the film industry, several prominent actors and directors have criticized recently implemented diversity standards, such as at the Academy Awards. Beginning in 2024, to be eligible for a best-picture nomination at the Academy Awards, a film must meet two of four diversity standards in order to qualify.[119]

Actor Richard Dreyfuss stated the Academy Award's diversity and inclusion standards "make me vomit", arguing that art should not be morally legislated.[120] Several major film directors, who are voting members of the Academy Awards, anonymously expressed their opposition to the new diversity standards to The New York Post, with one describing them as "contrived".[121] Film critic Armond White attacked the new standards as "progressive fascism", comparing them to the Hays Code.[122]

Conservative media sources, such as National Review, have also been frequent critics of DEI, with contributor George Leff arguing it is authoritarian and anti-meritocratic.[123]

Politics

In the 2020s, DEI came into the spotlight in American politics, especially in state legislatures in Texas and other Republican-controlled states.[124] Several states are considering or have passed legislation targeting DEI in public institutions. In March 2023, the Texas House of Representatives passed a bill with a rider banning the use of state funds for DEI programs in universities and colleges.[125] In May 2023, Texas passed legislation banning offices and programs promoting DEI at publicly funded colleges and universities.[126][127] In Iowa, a bill to ban spending on DEI in public universities was also advanced in March 2023.[128]

Several prominent Republicans positioned themselves as critics, including Florida Governor Ron DeSantis,[129] Texas Governor Greg Abbott,[15] and 2024 presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy.[130] In January 2024 the Florida Board of Education banned federal or state money being used toward DEI programs in universities.[131]

Another significant point of political controversy has been the implementation of DEI frameworks in the military, with Republican politicians frequently criticizing the efforts as "divisive" and as harming military efficiency and recruiting, while Democrats have defended it as beneficial and strengthening.[132] On 14 July 2023, the House of Representatives voted to ban all DEI offices and initiatives within the Pentagon and military along partisan lines, with all Democrats and four Republican members also opposing. The Senate, under Democratic control, has not acted.[133][134]

Public boycotts

Political opposition to corporate DEI efforts in the United States, particularly marketing criticized as "woke", have led to calls for boycotts of certain companies by activists and politicians; with notable examples being Disney, Target, Anheuser-Busch,[135] and Chick-fil-A.[136][137] Commentator Jonathan Turley of The Hill described such boycotts as possessing "some success".[138]

Some of these companies' responses to the controversies have, in turn, sparked criticism from progressives of "walking back" or failing DEI commitments.[139][140]

See also

References

  1. ^ ""DEI" — on Dictionary.com". dictionary.com. Retrieved 2023-03-25.
  2. ^ a b c d "What is diversity, equity, and inclusion?". McKinsey & Company. 17 August 2022. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  3. ^ Marabelli, Marco; Zaza, Sam; Masiero, Silvia; Chudoba, Kathy; Li, Lydia (2023). "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the AIS: Challenges and opportunities of remote conferences". Information Systems Journal. 33 (6): 1370–1395. doi:10.1111/isj.12458.
  4. ^ ""EDI" in Collins Dictionary". Collins. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  5. ^ "What does equality, diversity, and inclusion mean?". University of Edinburgh. 14 June 2022. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  6. ^ ""EDI" in Cambridge Dictionary". dictionary.cambridge.org. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  7. ^ Read, Bridget (26 May 2021). "Inside the Booming Diversity-Equity-and-Inclusion Industrial Complex". The Cut. Retrieved 21 September 2022.
  8. ^ "DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION AND BELONGING (DEIB)". bi.edu. BI Norwegian Business School. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  9. ^ "The Office of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging". University of Kansas. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  10. ^ Hammond, J. W.; Brownell, Sara E.; Kedharnath, Nita A.; Cheng, Susan J.; Byrd, W. Carson (23 September 2021). "Why the Term 'JEDI' Is Problematic for Describing Programs That Promote Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion". Scientific American. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  11. ^ "Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Justice (EDIJ)". Lesley University. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  12. ^ "Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access (IDEA)". Indiana Arts Commission. 30 April 2018. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  13. ^ "Definitions of Diversity, Equity, Accessibility, and Inclusion". American Alliance of Museums. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  14. ^ "Executive Order on Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility in the Federal Workforce". whitehouse.gov. 25 June 2021. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  15. ^ a b c d e Alfonseca, Kiara (10 February 2023). "DEI: What does it mean and what is its purpose?". ABC News. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  16. ^ "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Definitions". University of Washington. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  17. ^ "Diversity, Equity & Inclusion". Code for America. Retrieved 2022-03-23.
  18. ^ Grubbs, Vanessa (2020-07-23). "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion That Matter". New England Journal of Medicine. 383 (4): e25. doi:10.1056/NEJMpv2022639. PMID 32649073. S2CID 220465926.
  19. ^ Rosenkranz, Kari M.; Arora, Tania K.; Termuhlen, Paula M.; Stain, Steven C.; Misra, Subhasis; Dent, Daniel; Nfonsam, Valentine (July 2021). "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Medicine: Why It Matters and How do We Achieve It?". Journal of Surgical Education. 78 (4): 1058–1065. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.013. PMID 33279427. S2CID 227521028.
  20. ^ See the concluding chapter, "Demise of Affirmative Action in the Age of Diversity," in Terry H. Anderson, The Pursuit of Fairness: A History of Affirmative Action (2004) pp.217-273.
  21. ^ "President Kennedy's E.O.10925: Seedbed of Affirmative Action" (PDF). Society for History in the Federal Government. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 October 2020. Retrieved 20 August 2020.
  22. ^ A Brief History of Affirmative Action Archived 12 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine, University of California, Irvine (access date 16 May 2015)
  23. ^ Executive Order 11246
  24. ^ "Today's racial quotas? Senator Humphrey would've eaten his hat". Family News Network. January 20, 2022. Retrieved 17 July 2023.
  25. ^ "Affirmative Action". Harvard Blogs. Harvard Law School. Archived from the original on 18 May 2015. Retrieved 30 April 2015.
  26. ^ Tierney, William G. (1997). "The Parameters of Affirmative Action: Equity and Excellence in the Academy". Review of Educational Research. 67 (2): 165–196. ISSN 0034-6543. JSTOR 1170625.
  27. ^ "Equal Opportunity & Affirmative Action Policy Statement". chatham.edu. Archived from the original on 1 May 2015. Retrieved 30 April 2015.
  28. ^ Sowell, Thomas (2004). Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study, Yale University Press, ISBN 0-300-10199-6
  29. ^ Affirmative Action. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1 April 2009.
  30. ^ Steven M. Gillon, "The strange career of affirmative action: the Civil Rights Act of 1964" in his "That's Not What We Meant to Do": Reform and Its Unintended Consequences in Twentieth-Century America (WW Norton, 2000) p. 152.
  31. ^ The Court ruled: “The diversity that furthers a compelling state interest encompasses a far broader array of qualifications and characteristics of which racial or ethnic origin is but a single though important element," quoted in Brent K., Nakamura, and Lauren B. Edelman, "Bakke at 40: How diversity matters in the employment context." UC Davis Law Review 52 (2018): 2627-2679 at p. 2629. online
  32. ^ Erin Kelly, and Frank Dobbin, "How affirmative action became diversity management: Employer response to antidiscrimination law, 1961 to 1996." American Behavioral Scientist 41.7 (1998): 960-984. online
  33. ^ "Is diversity management related to financial performance in family firms? performance has created the relevance for this concept". Family Business Review. 28.
  34. ^ Newkirk, Pamela (10 October 2019). "Diversity Has Become a Booming Business. So Where Are the Results?". Time. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  35. ^ "An INSIGHT Investigation: Accounting for Just 0.5% of Higher Education's Budgets, Even Minimal Diversity Funding Supports Their Bottom Line". INSIGHT. 16 October 2019. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  36. ^ "Global Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Industry". Global Industry Analysts. October 2022. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  37. ^ Bridget Read, "Reckoning with as Reckoning: Doing the Work at Work What are companies desperate for diversity consultants actually buying?" New York: The Cut, May 26, 2021 online.
  38. ^ a b c d "Workplace diversity programmes often fail, or backfire". The Economist. 25 August 2022. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  39. ^ Nino Monea, "Next on the Chopping Block: The Litigation Campaign against Race-Conscious Policies Beyond Affirmative Action in University Admissions." (SSRN 4440549, 2023) online
  40. ^ Schwarzschild, Maimon and Heriot, Gail L., Race Preferences, Diversity, and Students for Fair Admissions: A New Day, a New Clarity (January 16, 2024). SMU Law Review, Forthcoming (2024), San Diego Legal Studies Paper No. 24-003, online
  41. ^ Ariana Baio, "Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action, banning colleges from factoring race in admissions: In a 6 -3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled higher education institutions may not consider race as a factor in admissions" The Independent (29 June 2023) online
  42. ^ Dan Morgan, "Supreme Court rejects affirmative action at colleges as unconstitutional" CNBC June 29, 2023 online
  43. ^ Cara McClellan, "When Claims Collide: Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and the Meaning of Discrimination." U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper 23-20 (2023). online
  44. ^ Gill, Gurwinder Kaur; McNally, Mary Jane; Berman, Vin (2018-08-16). "Effective diversity, equity, and inclusion practices". Healthcare Management Forum. 31 (5): 196–199. doi:10.1177/0840470418773785. PMID 30114938. S2CID 52019098.
  45. ^ Noah (2023-01-07). "Equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the workplace". Diversity And Inclusion. Retrieved 2023-03-08.
  46. ^ University, Carnegie Mellon. "Homepage - Diversity, Equity and Inclusion - Carnegie Mellon University". www.cmu.edu. Retrieved 2022-03-21.
  47. ^ "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion - University of Houston". uh.edu. Retrieved 2022-03-21.
  48. ^ Bohanon, Mariah (2022-03-16). "DEI in Accreditation". INSIGHT Into Diversity. Retrieved 2022-10-01.
  49. ^ "Diversity and Inclusion in the Standards | AACSB". www.aacsb.edu. Retrieved 2022-10-01.
  50. ^ Harris-Hasan, Alandra (9 October 2014). "What Is Really Going On: Black Graduate Students in Higher Education". Diverse Issues in Higher Education. 31 (18): 58.
  51. ^ Bolster, Alexander; Jameel, Leila (2024-01-31). "Evaluating the experiences of a staff equality, diversity and inclusion reflective space". Reflective Practice: 1–24. doi:10.1080/14623943.2024.2309882. ISSN 1462-3943.
  52. ^ Ph.D, Jay P. Greene. "Equity Elementary: "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion" Staff in Public Schools". The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 2022-03-23.
  53. ^ Keshri, Vikash Ranjan; Bhaumik, Soumyadeep (September 2022). "The feudal structure of global health and its implications for decolonisation". BMJ Global Health. 7 (9): e010603. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010603. PMC 9516156. PMID 36167407.
  54. ^ Obah Jr., Herbert (2023). "Black and Asian Allyship Through Impromptu Speaking". In Sha, Mandy; Lee, Cassandra (eds.). If we can do it, you can, too!. Amazon Digital Services LLC - Kdp. pp. 13–16. ISBN 9798379235413.
  55. ^ Alecia Taylor, "3 Ways That Anti-DEI Efforts Are Changing How Colleges Operate" Chronicle of Higher Education (January 18, 2024)
  56. ^ Dobbin, Frank; Kalev, Alexandra (September 2018). "Why Doesn't Diversity Training Work? The Challenge for Industry and Academia". Anthropology Now. Taylor & Francis Online. 10 (2): 48–55. doi:10.1080/19428200.2018.1493182. S2CID 158262607. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  57. ^ a b Nathoo, Zulekha (17 June 2021). "Why ineffective diversity training won't go away". BBC. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  58. ^ Morrison, Richard (5 March 2022). "Commentary: Diversity training is unpopular because it doesn't work (but companies could change that)". Competitive Enterprise Institute. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  59. ^ a b Bregman, Peter (12 March 2012). "Diversity Training Doesn't Work". Harvard Business Reviews. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  60. ^ Brownlee, Dana (August 11, 2022). "This Is Why Corporate DEI Tragically Fails Many Black Professionals". Forbes.
  61. ^ a b "American universities are hiring based on devotion to diversity". The Economist. 4 Feb 2023. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  62. ^ "FIRE Statement on the Use of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Criteria in Faculty Hiring and Evaluation". Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  63. ^ "The 2022 AAUP Survey of Tenure Practices". American Association of University Professors. 16 May 2022. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  64. ^ Heald, Rebecca; Wildermuth, Mary. "Initiative to Advance Faculty Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Life Science at UC Berkeley" (PDF). ofew.berkeley.edu. University of California, Berkeley. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2023-03-26. Retrieved 16 June 2023.
  65. ^ "AFA Calls for An End to Required Diversity Statements". Academic Freedom Alliance. 22 August 2022. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  66. ^ Tuccille, J.D. (30 September 2022). "Mandated Diversity Statement Drives Jonathan Haidt To Quit Academic Society". Reason. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  67. ^ Camp, Emma (19 September 2022). "Want An Academic Job? Start Preparing Your DEI Statement". Reason. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  68. ^ Sailer, John (7 September 2022). "Higher Ed's New Woke Loyalty Oaths". Tablet. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  69. ^ a b Marijolovic, Kate (28 February 2023). "Professors Are Sharply Divided on DEI Statements in Hiring, Survey Finds". Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  70. ^ "DEI Definitions". University of Iowa. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  71. ^ Murphy, Colleen (11 January 2023). "Equity vs. Equality: What's the Difference?". health.com. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  72. ^ Minow, Martha (21 September 2021). "Equality vs. Equity". American Journal of Law and Equality. MIT. 1 (1): 167–193. doi:10.1162/ajle_a_00019. S2CID 240522063.
  73. ^ "Diversity, equality and the law in the UK" (PDF). UK Parliament. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  74. ^ Lipson, Charles (4 March 2021). "'Equity' Is a Mandate to Discriminate". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  75. ^ Peterson, Jordan (10 May 2019). "Jordan Peterson: When the left goes too far — the dangerous doctrine of equity". The National Post. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  76. ^ "FREEDOM OF SPEECH, DIVERSITY, AND INCLUSION". American Council of Education. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  77. ^ "New FIRE model legislation takes on DEI bureaucracy's chilling effect on campus". Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. 16 February 2023. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  78. ^ Friedman, Jonathan (20 February 2020). "WHEN DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION CLASH WITH FREE SPEECH—AND WHY THEY DON'T HAVE TO". PEN America. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  79. ^ Powell, Michael (21 October 2021). "M.I.T.'s Choice of Lecturer Ignited Criticism. So Did Its Decision to Cancel". New York Times. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  80. ^ "Politics overshadowing scientific work". CNN. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  81. ^ a b "The Illusion of Consensus: An Interview with Professor Jeffrey Flier, M.D." Academic Freedom Alliance. 21 March 2023. Retrieved 31 March 2023.
  82. ^ Morey, Alex; Conza, Sabrina (13 March 2023). "Stanford Law students shout down 5th Circuit judge: A post-mortem". Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  83. ^ Millhiser, Ian (14 March 2023). "A new Supreme Court case could be the most important transgender rights decision ever". Vox. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  84. ^ Goodman, Sylvia (22 March 2023). "Stanford Law's Diversity Dean Is 'on Leave' as Controversy Boils Over a Disrupted Speech". Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  85. ^ "The Tyranny of the DEI Bureaucracy". Wall Street Journal. 17 March 2023. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  86. ^ Steinbach, Tirien (23 March 2023). "Diversity and Free Speech Can Coexist at Stanford". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  87. ^ "Stanford DEI Dean Escalates Battle against Law-School Dean" Ed Whelan, National Review, March 23, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
  88. ^ a b Martinez, Jenny S. (22 March 2023). "SLS Letter from Dean" (PDF). Stanford Law School. Retrieved 3 April 2023.
  89. ^ "Scientists Defend Merit in Science". indefenseofmerit.org. 28 April 2023. Retrieved 21 June 2023.
  90. ^ Coyne, Jerry A.; Krylov, Anna I. (27 April 2023). "The 'Hurtful' Idea of Scientific Merit". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 21 June 2023.
  91. ^ a b c d "Anti-racism trainer accused of bullying principal who later died says she welcomes review". Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The Canadian Press. 28 July 2023. Retrieved 3 August 2023.
  92. ^ a b c d "Anti-racism trainer accused of bullying Toronto principal who later died welcomes Ontario review". The Globe and Mail. The Canadian Press. 29 July 2023. Retrieved 3 August 2023.
  93. ^ "Education minister orders review into allegations of TDSB principal who died by suicide". Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The Canadian Press. 25 July 2023. Retrieved 3 August 2023.
  94. ^ Blaff, Ari (24 July 2023). "Former Toronto Principal Bullied By Equity Consultants For His 'Whiteness' Commits Suicide, Leaves Family and Friends 'Reeling'". National Review. Retrieved 3 August 2023.
  95. ^ Abrams, Chaya M.; Armeni, Kelsey (2023). "The Lived Experiences of Anti-Semitism Encountered by Jewish Students on University Campuses: A Phenomenological Study" (PDF). American Journal of Qualitative Research. 7 (3): 172–191. doi:10.29333/ajqr/13482. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  96. ^ Rosen, Armin (4 October 2022). "Campus Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Excludes and Targets Jews". Tablet Mag. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  97. ^ Bedzow, Ira (24 November 2021). "DEI Training Needs To Take Antisemitism Seriously". Forbes. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  98. ^ "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Programming's Antisemitism Failures; Buffalo Shooting and Great Replacement Theory". American Jewish Committee. 19 May 2022. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  99. ^ Spindel, Andria (8 August 2023). "DEI: Not diverse, equitable, or inclusive if antisemitism is ignored - opinion". Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  100. ^ Goldfarb, Stanley (2 November 2023). "How DEI Inspires Jew Hatred". City Journal. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  101. ^ Duggan, Laurel (31 October 2023). "The DEI industry has an antisemitism problem". UnHerd. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  102. ^ Suzanna Sherry, "DEI and Antisemitism: Bred in the Bone" Vanderbilt University Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series Working Paper Number 24-4 (January 23, 2024). online
  103. ^ Lee, Tabia (22 October 2023). "When 'Critical Social Justice' Rules on Campus". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  104. ^ Carter, Ray (27 October 2023). "AMID DEI BACKDROP, OU STUDENTS CONDEMN ISRAEL". Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  105. ^ a b Asimov, Nanette (14 May 2023). "'I declared myself not woke': What happened when a critic of anti-racism 'ideology' led DEI at a Bay Area college". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  106. ^ "Overview of Complaints Filed Against Stanford University" (PDF). Brandeis Center. 15 June 2021. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
  107. ^ Knott, Katherine (15 November 2023). "House Republicans Blame DEI Programs for Rise in Campus Antisemitism". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved 11 December 2023.
  108. ^ "CNBC Transcript: Pershing Square Capital Management CEO Bill Ackman Speaks with CNBC's "Squawk Box" Today". CNBC. 6 November 2023. Retrieved 11 December 2023.
  109. ^ Mac Donald, Heather (6 December 2023). "DEI Drives Campus Antisemitism". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 11 December 2023.
  110. ^ Saul, Stephanie (26 October 2023). "Who Decides Penn's Future: Donors or the University?". New York Times. Retrieved 11 December 2023.
  111. ^ a b Zakaria, Fareed. "Opinion: Why university presidents are under fire". CNN. Retrieved 11 December 2023.
  112. ^ a b "We Need to Talk About Dog-Whistle Diversity". Time. 2017-11-29. Retrieved 2023-06-21.
  113. ^ "Organizations are leaving disabled workers behind in their DEI efforts — here's how they can do better". The Conversation. 2017-11-29.
  114. ^ "Why Businesses Must Stop Disregarding People With Disabilities". Time. 2023-01-12.
  115. ^ "Op-Ed: Employers' diversity and equity efforts often overlook people with disabilities". CNBC. 2021-04-21.
  116. ^ "Disability fashion: Stephanie Thomas is shaking up the fashion industry". URevolution. 2019-06-20.
  117. ^ Taylor Telford, "As DEI gets more divisive, companies are ditching their teams" Washington Post February 18, 2024, online
  118. ^ Chronicle Staff, "DEI Legislation Tracker: Explore where college diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts are under attack" Chronicle of Higher Education February 16, 2024.
  119. ^ Buchanan, Kyle (9 September 2020). "The Oscars' New Diversity Rules Are Sweeping but Safe". The New York Times.
  120. ^ Murphy, Jim K. (6 May 2023). "Richard Dreyfuss Slams New Diversity Requirements for Oscar Contention: 'They Make Me Vomit'". Variety.
  121. ^ Giang-Paunon, Stephanie (17 June 2023). "Oscars voters slam Hollywood inclusion standards amid new diversity rules". Fox News.
  122. ^ White, Armond (11 September 2020). "Our Sovietized Oscars". National Review.
  123. ^ "Diversity, Equity, Inclusion — Manipulating Words for Political Goals". National Review. 15 March 2021.
  124. ^ Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, "State Legislatures Targeting DEI in Higher Education" (Jun 29, 2023) online
  125. ^ Menchaca, Megan. "Texas House panel OKs funding ban for college DEI programs in draft budget. Here's why". Austin American-Statesman. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  126. ^ Burch, Audra D. S. (29 May 2023). "Texas Lawmakers Pass Ban on D.E.I. Programs at State Universities". New York Times. Retrieved 4 June 2023.
  127. ^ "Senate Bill 17". capitol.texas.gov. Retrieved 4 June 2023.
  128. ^ Sostaric, Katarina (1 March 2023). "Bill to ban DEI spending at public universities advances in Iowa House". Iowa Public Radio. Retrieved 25 March 2023.
  129. ^ "Ron DeSantis announces plan to block DEI programs in state colleges". The Guardian. 2 Feb 2023. Retrieved 26 March 2023.
  130. ^ Terruso, Julia; Brennan, Chris (20 June 2023). "Who is Vivek Ramaswamy? A look at the GOP presidential candidate's first visit to Philadelphia". Inquirer.
  131. ^ "Florida board bans use of state, federal dollars for DEI programs at state universities - CBS Miami". www.cbsnews.com. 2024-01-24. Retrieved 2024-01-28.
  132. ^ Shane III, Leo (19 July 2023). "Military academies' diversity efforts draw GOP concerns, Dem support". militarytimes.com. Sightline Media Group. Retrieved 1 August 2023.
  133. ^ Carbonaro, Giulia (14 July 2023). "Republicans Ban All Racial Diversity Offices Inside Military". Newsweek. Retrieved 1 August 2023.
  134. ^ Uebelacker, Erik (13 July 2023). "House Approves GOP Measure Banning Military DEI Initiatives by One Vote". The Daily Beast. Retrieved 1 August 2023.
  135. ^ "Bud Light loses top US beer spot after promotion with transgender influencer". The Guardian. 14 June 2023. Retrieved 1 Jan 2024.
  136. ^ Valinsky, Jordan (2 June 2023). "How Chick-fil-A became a target for going 'woke'". CNN. Retrieved 21 June 2023.
  137. ^ Mordowanec, Nick (30 May 2023). "Chick-fil-A Faces a Conservative Revolt". Newsweek. Retrieved 21 June 2023.
  138. ^ "Consumers fight back, with some success, against brands gone woke". The Hill. 27 May 2023.
  139. ^ Stewart, Emily (19 May 2023). "The Bud Light boycott, explained as much as is possible". Vox. Retrieved 21 June 2023.
  140. ^ Reuter, Dominick (24 May 2023). "Target workers say the abrupt removal of Pride month displays has alienated some LGBTQ employees". Business Insider. Retrieved 21 June 2023.

Further reading

Primary sources