A new era of EDI work in a turbulent time

Over the past decade, equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI, also referred to as DEI) programs have grown exponentially. Many companies and organizations have eagerly embraced EDI efforts, highlighting the extensive research by psychologists and other scientists demonstrating that organizational diversity enhances well-being, collaboration, and problem-solving (Jaiswal, A., & Dyaram, L., Employee Relations, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2019opens in new window; Harrell, S. P., in Warren, M. A., & Donaldson, S. I. [Eds.], Toward a Positive Psychology of Relationships, Praeger/ABC-CLIO, 2018).

But that growth has also inflamed considerable resistance, including from state and federal lawmakers who have introduced and enacted policies to block organizations from having EDI programs altogether. Through at least 85 bills (as of press time) across 28 states and the U.S. Congress, lawmakers have aimed to prohibit universities and other organizations from implementing EDI-related practices, including the establishment of EDI offices, mandatory diversity training, and the use of diversity statements in hiring and promotions (“DEI Legislation Tracker,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2024opens in new window). Alongside these external legal challenges, which often dominate the headlines, many institutions face substantial internal opposition to EDI initiatives that can breed resentment among members and prevent leaders from building more inclusive environments.

“It’s a scary time for people working in this area, but our work is just as critical as ever,” said Mikki Hebl, PhD, Martha and Henry Malcolm Lovett Chair of Psychology at Rice University, who studies diversity and discrimination-related issues. EDI programs are designed to foster equity for all groups, including, but not limited to, historically excluded ones. To continue this work, Hebl emphasized the need for a new era of advocacy and research that addresses the turbulent political and legal challenges head-on. This means that amid the current backlash, organizations may need to fundamentally reimagine their approach to EDI.

“This will be a marathon, not a sprint,” said Hebl. “But this is also an opportunity for us to use the strongest science and advocacy we have to build safer, more inclusive spaces across many institutions.”

Criticisms of EDI have historically centered around three main arguments: its perceived ineffectiveness, concerns over promoting certain political ideologies, and the potential division of people based on their identities. In 2024, these criticisms have escalated into new statewide efforts to entirely dismantle EDI programs. “DEI has always been underappreciated, underfunded, and undervalued, but challenges to diversity efforts are now legislative,” said Shaun Harper, PhD, a professor of education, business, and public policy at the University of Southern California (USC).

At least 11 states have active laws restricting EDI initiatives. Some of these policies, like one in Alabama, prohibit the use of state fundsopens in new window for diversity-based programs and offices on college campuses. Other states, such as Texas, have banned diversity offices at universities entirely. In Florida, the state Supreme Court recently ruled that a law restricting private businesses from conducting diversity training is unconstitutionalopens in new window, prompting some lawmakers and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to propose alternative measures to prevent workplaces from holding EDI training.

Even in states where anti-EDI bills have not been proposed or passed, Harper warns that institutions may experience a “chilling effect” over uncertainty about which practices might soon become illegal. Already, in response to state legislation and intensifying political pressure, at least 116 college campuses have altered or eliminated offices, positions, hiring practices, and programs that explicitly recruit and retain individuals from marginalized communities (Hicks, M., The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2024opens in new window).

Adding to the tension, presidential candidate Donald Trump has pledged to cut federal funding for schools that include curricula, books, or classes addressing race, racism, gender, and sexuality, stoking concerns of a nationwide effort to dismantle EDI practices (“Trump on DEI and Anti-Discrimination Law,” American Civil Liberties Union, 2024opens in new window). Harper emphasized that leaders in states where EDI initiatives are currently “safe” must remain proactive. “It will take a collective effort to protect these initiatives and the well-being of the many students and employees who benefit from them,” said Harper, who is also the founder and executive director of the USC Race and Equity Center.

Education is a particularly volatile battleground, with most anti-EDI state laws specifically targeting K–12 schools and colleges. However, the scrutiny and legal challenges extend to workplaces as well. John Deere, a Fortune 500 company, recently faced backlash for its diversity hiring targets and sponsorship of LGBTQ+ Pride eventsopens in new window. In response, the company announced it would audit its policies and cease participation in external “social or cultural awareness” events. Other major companies, including Microsoftopens in new window and Zoomopens in new window, have also gutted their EDI teams, claiming a “lack of relevance” to business operations.

Some experts say that much of the opposition to EDI stems from deep-seated misconceptions about its purpose and effects. “There is a lot of misunderstanding about what DEI is and how it looks on the ground,” said Dustin McKee, CEO of the Ohio Psychological Association (OPA).

One goal of OPA’s advocacy efforts is to dispel those misconceptions. In June 2023, when Ohio lawmakers proposed a bill to ban mandatory EDI trainingopens in new window and related policies in higher education, OPA advocated for exceptions for programs necessary for professional licensure, such as cultural competency training for psychologists. “The bill’s sponsors were concerned about the stifling of certain viewpoints in educational settings. Our team emphasized that we shared the desire to promote open sharing of ideas but also stressed the importance of training practitioners in psychology to meet the needs of a diverse population,” explained McKee.

A key challenge for advocates is to establish a shared definition of EDI amid its politically charged context. “In our advocacy, we found that discussing the social determinants of health and health outcomes resonated with people much more than [the term] DEI,” McKee said. “Unfortunately, the term has taken on a new and sometimes divisive meaning in our lexicon.”

Researchers stress that “equity,” “diversity,” and “inclusion” are not just buzzwords. When correctly implemented, these practices are foundational to the health and productivity of any community or organization, said Hebl. In schools, students from diverse backgrounds bring a wealth of perspectives that enrich the learning experience for everyone. As a result, inclusive learning environments promote better academic outcomes and psychological well-being for all students (Lau, Y., Labour Economics, Vol. 78, 2022opens in new window; Vang, T. M., & Nishina, A., Journal of School Health, Vol. 92, No. 4, 2022opens in new window).

Research also consistently shows that diverse teams are more innovative and effective than their homogeneous counterparts (Rock, D., & Grant, H., Harvard Business Review, 2016opens in new window). By challenging conventional thinking and fostering creative problem-solving, inclusive organizations empower individuals to share their unique expertise and knowledge. This diversity of thought helps teams consider a wider range of possibilities and avoid groupthink, enabling them to solve complex problems more effectively. In the workplace, EDI practices drive greater engagement, higher employee retention, and better decision-making (Downey, S. N., et al., Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 45, No. 1, 2015opens in new window; McKay, P. F., et al., Personnel Psychology, Vol. 60, No. 1, 2007opens in new window).

Notably, these benefits extend to all employees, not just those from historically underrepresented groups. A 2023 Pew Research Center survey of 5,902 workers found that, among those whose workplace offers EDI resources, a majority of employees say the measures have positively impacted their work environment (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Workplace, PEW Research Center, 2023opens in new window). “People often fear that DEI initiatives are about exclusion, or favoring some people at the expense of others, but it isn’t a zero-sum game,” explained Hebl. “A system that is inclusive of the most disadvantaged person is typically the most inclusive for all users.”

EDI programs have also been linked to improved financial performance, providing another compelling reason for businesses to embrace these practices, says Quinetta Roberson, PhD, John A. Hannah Professor of Organizational Behavior at Michigan State University’s Broad College of Business (Gomez, L. E., & Bernet, P., Journal of the National Medical Association, Vol. 111, No. 4, 2019opens in new window). Through her research on diversity, leadership, and talent management, Roberson has found that diverse teams are often better equipped to connect with and serve a broader customer base, leading to increases in market share and customer loyalty (Group & Organization Management, Vol. 32, No. 5, 2007opens in new window). According to another study by the Harvard Business Review, diverse teams are 70% more likely to capture new audiences than their less diverse competitors (Hewlett, S. A., et al., Harvard Business Review, 2013opens in new window). Fostering diversity can also create a competitive advantage for companies hoping to attract and retain top-tier employees (Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, No. 3, 2003opens in new window).

While the primary goal of EDI practices should be to create better work environments, Roberson said it is also critical to highlight how EDI aligns with and advances business objectives rather than simply state the moral case for belonging. “In many organizations, the programs that get cut are those that don’t boost the bottom line in an obvious way, such as leadership development or EDI initiatives,” said Roberson. “By presenting clear evidence that EDI programs produce positive outcomes—whether financial, related to employee performance, or otherwise—we can establish that prioritizing EDI helps everyone achieve their shared goals.”

Considering the tumultuous legal context surrounding diversity initiatives, leaders can leverage this moment to rethink how they communicate about EDI—not only to shield against backlash but also to ensure these initiatives drive significant, lasting change.

That requires integrating EDI into the core mission of the organization rather than approaching it as an ancillary effort. “EDI is often treated as a stand-alone initiative. Organizations might say, ‘These are our main objectives, and oh, we should do EDI on the side,’” Roberson said. Drawing from her experience working with corporations as an EDI adviser, she underscored that EDI programs are most effective when “embedded” into the organization, such as by building robust infrastructure to measure progress and expanding EDI efforts beyond the human resources department.

Roberson also cautions institutional leaders against using the “plug and play” approach—in other words, blindly adopting successful EDI practices from other organizations without considering their fit within the unique context of one’s own team.

“Rather than saying that you want to increase your workforce diversity for the sake of diversifying, think about the why,” Roberson said. “Why will diversifying help you better serve your customer or client base? Why will diversity help your team meet their numbers and communicate more effectively?”

She encourages workplace leadership, particularly middle managers who interact daily with employees, to engage their workforce as informative resources. “Spend time with the people that make your organization diverse. Ask them about the realities and challenges that they experience.” Her research further highlights the importance of relational leadership—connecting with, showing genuine interest in, and building trust in diverse teams—as a powerful way to foster shared identity and collaboration. (Group & Organization Management, Vol. 47, No. 4, 2022opens in new window).

For instance, leaders can enhance team dynamics by assigning projects to various members instead of relying on those with work styles and thinking patterns most like their own. They might also create intentional working groups that invite divergent viewpoints and break up cliques. Most important, leaders should regularly check in with their teams to assess how different initiatives are performing. By embracing a learning mindset, institutional leaders can adopt a new fundamental approach to EDI: understanding the needs of every individual, identifying patterns of difference that impact the entire organization, and developing holistic solutions to address those differences. This framing also demonstrates that EDI programs are not just for historically underrepresented employees; they benefit everyone.

Psychologists underscore that the burden of EDI work should not disproportionately fall on historically underrepresented groups as organizations build their EDI infrastructure. Assigning the often uncompensated tasks of EDI—such as unofficial mentorship roles, leading affinity groups, or recruitment efforts—to a few underrepresented individuals can increase burnout, compound psychological stress, and detract from their primary professional responsibilities (Gewin, V., Nature, Vol. 583, No. 7816, 2020opens in new window; Faucett, E. A., et al., Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Vol. 166, No. 6, 2022opens in new window). This approach not only fails to recognize the value of their contributions but also undermines the broader goals of EDI initiatives.

Instead of relying on uncompensated labor from employees, organizations should consider partnering with external EDI experts and financially invest in developing research-backed EDI programs. “I would never imagine telling a chemist, ‘You need to titrate this better,’ because I don’t have that expertise. In the same way, instead of following the masses, organizations should consult with psychologists and other scientists who study EDI to understand what constitutes effective diversity training, or how to build sustainable mentorship programs,” Hebl said. By leveraging expert knowledge and evidence-based practices, organizations are more likely to create robust EDI frameworks that support all employees and drive long-term success.

As EDI initiatives across the country face unprecedented opposition, individuals and organizations can also take strategic action to protect diversity efforts.

To mitigate legal liability, leaders in states with restrictive legislation may develop EDI practices that foster a diverse and inclusive workplace culture without directly benefiting specific individuals. For example, organizations can create a more inclusive office environment by providing all-gender bathrooms, nursing rooms, and childcare facilities. Additionally, instead of limiting participation in EDI programs to specific demographic groups, organizations can open these programs to all employees who demonstrate a commitment to equity and inclusion goals (Yoshino, K., & Glasgow, D., Harvard Business Review, 2024opens in new window).

Keeping a comprehensive record of EDI initiatives and their outcomes, such as improvements in employee engagement and satisfaction, will help further protect against challenges. “Show your work and have evidence to counter caricatures of DEI. If you can demonstrate why these programs are vital to your organization, both in terms of measurable goals and organizational culture, you will be better prepared to face opposition,” said Harper.

This data transparency is also crucial for tracking the progress of EDI programs. Quantifying disparities in hiring, compensation, promotion, and other metrics allows organizations to measure the impact of their initiatives. In 2023, only 154 of the Fortune 500 companies released EDI reports—double the number from 2022 but still less than a third of the list. Many companies also failed to collect data on the representation of women, people of color, employees with disabilities, and other groups (“Corporate Diversity Data: What Fortune 500 DEI Reports Reveal,” Purpose Brand, November 9, 2023opens in new window). Better tracking and sharing of EDI data and goals can help organizations boost accountability and make more informed decisions amid legislative efforts to undermine EDI.

Individuals also play a crucial role in defending diversity initiatives. Employees who have benefited from their organization’s EDI programs can reach out to leadership to share their positive experiences and underscore the importance of equity efforts. McKee also encourages individuals to contact their state legislators, who are “far more accessible than people realize,” and express their backing for EDI programming.

Psychologists can also partner with their state psychological association and use their unique positions to advocate for EDI efforts. At OPA, McKee and his team have focused on building standing relationships with state lawmakers. “We encourage our members to build strong connections with their local legislators, so when a behavioral health or EDI-related bill crosses their desks, they consult with us as trusted experts on these issues,” McKee explained.

Above all, Harper stresses the need to create nonjudgmental spaces for lawmakers, institutional leaders, and other stakeholders to learn about EDI. “When we allow executives and other people to be honest about their illiteracy—to openly share what they don’t understand about DEI—we give them the opportunity to identify their growth areas,” he explained.

As EDI becomes more politically divisive, finding shared ground among a wide array of human experiences is vital to fortify the far-reaching benefits of equity work. “One of the most impactful actions psychologists can take is to build human-to-human relationships with state lawmakers,” McKee advised. “Even if there is disagreement 95% of the time, that connection will be a more powerful vehicle for persuasion than anything else.”