Sustaining EDI efforts in a challenging new normal

[This article is part of the 2025 Trends Report]

In 2024, more than 30 statesopens in new window introduced or passed laws limiting equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI, often interchanged with DEI) initiatives while several high-profile companiesopens in new window retreated from their EDI commitments because of legal and political pressures. Despite this challenging landscape, many organizations and individuals committed to EDI remain resolute, continuing their work while complying with new legal constraints. Psychologists are at the forefront, stepping up with science-informed strategies to address the unique needs of the communities they serve while adapting to the new normal.

The year 2025 promises to be a difficult one as the incoming administration has voiced opposition to funding federal EDI programs. Tabbye Chavous, PhD, vice provost for equity and inclusion and chief diversity officer at the University of Michigan, stressed the importance of EDI does not depend on any single election. “Now more than ever, it is essential that we focus on bridging divides and dismantling systemic barriers for equitable access, success, and thriving,” she said.

Ella F. Washington, PhD, an organizational psychologist, professor of practice at Georgetown’s McDonough School of Business, and founder and CEO of Ellavate Solutions, views the current hostility toward EDI as part of a repeating cycle. “DEI has consistently gone through ebbs and flows of popularity and support over 40-plus years,” she said. Washington advises businesses to remain steadfast to the strategies they instituted in years past rather than getting back on the bandwagon when EDI regains popularity in the future. “The pendulum has always swung back and forth. Companies have to realize this is their opportunity to show that they’re committed. Their employees and customers are paying attention.”

Experts have extensively studied the complex reasons EDI efforts falter or fail. Keith Payne, PhD, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, uses social identity theory to explain why dominant groups might push back against efforts to change racial inequality. A key principle of the theory posits that socially and economically fortunate individuals perform a lot of cognitive work to view themselves and their ingroups positively, believing inequities are due to their own hard work (Harwood, J., in Van den Bulck, J. [Ed.], International Encyclopedia of Media Psychology, John Wiley & Sons, 2020opens in new window).

North Carolina’s EDI ban led the state’s public universities to eliminate EDI offices and terminate multiple positionsopens in new window. This had a significant impact on faculty like Payne, who studies how inequality shapes the human mind. “Many people at universities like mine that are rolling back DEI initiatives are afraid of retaliation from upper administration,” he noted. “[University] leaders can signal that an organization is safe for free speech and open conversation about these issues by not retaliating or pressuring people.” Payne recommended participants in such conversations should have empathy for those holding opposing views and understand how their social identities shape their self-perceptions as good and reasonable people.

Payne has found innovative ways to continue addressing crucial EDI-related topics in his teaching. Because of widespread misunderstanding among students of what systemic racism is and how it works, Payne revamped one of his courses. He now devotes a third of the semester of his “Psychology of Racism and Discrimination” class to reading Reconstruction-era history. He has found that many students are lacking this basic knowledge, which would help them understand the historic underpinnings of systemic racism, the systems and structures—rather than individual attitudes and prejudices—behind historic and present-day racial inequalities. From this launchpad, students can better grasp the psychology behind groups’ varying responses to efforts to change racial hierarchy, both then and now.

Payne’s approach of fostering informed discussions on racism and prejudice is consistent with research on how inclusive leadership influences openness to diversity among teams. Drawing from social identity theory, researchers found identifying with and wanting to be part of a work group, connecting with teammates, and being able to express oneself without concern for negative consequences can positively shift views on safety and diversity (Woods, A., et al. Psychology of Leaders and Leadership, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2024opens in new window).

Similarly, when Ivuoma Onyeador, PhD, and colleagues analyzed the effectiveness of 163 diversity training programs, they found that disseminating knowledge about distinct political, cultural, and social histories, identity formation, and power dynamics of underrepresented groups can lead to greater support of diversity initiatives (Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2024opens in new window).

Resistance can nevertheless remain intense. System justification theory explains this resistance as the natural tendency to justify the status quo as evidence of one’s own worth. Usman Liaquat, PhD, a social psychologist at Cornell University, and Emily Balcetis, PhD, an associate professor of psychology at New York University, recommend a clear, consistent, and thoughtful communications approach to address system justification.

“In this contentious environment, one thing people might want to do is highlight there is a consensus on this moral justification for why we need diversity,” Liaquat commented. “From a system justification perspective, when people perceive that there’s a broad social consensus on a particular issue, then they may be less likely to resist these changes” (Social Issues and Policy Review, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2023opens in new window).

Balcetis suggests framing EDI in terms of long-standing American values like equality and human rights and using well-established metaphors like “melting pot.” She also cautions against using “zero-sum” framing and instead positioning EDI initiatives as opportunities for improvement that benefit everyone.

According to Markus Brauer, PhD, a social psychologist at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, influencing social norms by embedding EDI into an institution’s values and practices is more likely to drive behavior change than efforts to change intergroup attitudes (Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2024opens in new window).

Washington routinely counsels her clients to integrate EDI into core strategy, lest it be seen as easily disposable in the face of opposition. “If DEI is actually integrated into your business strategy, you’ll find a way to make sure the most vital programs are protected,” she said.

The University of Michigan has been navigating the challenges of a ban on race-based admissions since 2006, long before last year’s Supreme Court ruling. Chavous explained that this challenge early on allowed them to develop innovative yet legally compliant strategies to maintain their EDI goals. Chavous added that integrating EDI across the university’s core mission, operations, and procedures makes their efforts harder to dismantle, even when programs with specific labels are targeted.

Chavous and her team employ a multifaceted approach, drawing on psychological and sociological frameworks to guide their work. They also continually consult their Office of General Counsel to ensure all EDI initiatives comply with the law to safeguard their work from potential legal challenges.

One successful strategy has been early outreach to middle and high schools across the state to counter declining Black student enrollment. This proactive approach helped create a diverse applicant pool while playing by the state’s rules. “We’re proud of the work that we’ve done to turn those trends in the opposite direction,” she said. “At the same time, we are working on efforts to support every single community on our campus.” One example: Recruitment efforts in low-income rural areas have benefited many White students.

As challenges to EDI mount, some institutions are emphasizing inclusion rather than diversity or equity. While this strategy aims to broaden the appeal of diversity efforts, experts stress the importance of nuanced and careful execution.

In July 2024, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) announced it was pivoting to a “leading with inclusion” approach, dropping “equity” from the DEI acronym. Several SHRM members reacted negativelyopens in new window and accused the organization of abandoning equity.

SHRM CEO Johnny C. Taylor defended the shift in strategy on the Culture Leaders podcastopens in new window, citing data from corporate leaders and employees. “The data told us very clearly that the ‘E’ was creating a lot of division, divisiveness, disagreement, and incivility because people didn’t have a common agreement about what the ‘E’ was,” Taylor explained to the podcast host, Jessica Kriegel. “[SHRM] chose to go down not the path of abandoning inclusion and diversity but focusing on those things that we think will help move this conversation further.”

Other experts advocate alternative approaches. “I struggle with decentering equity, because in a lot of ways, that’s where the rubber meets the road,” Washington said. Instead, she recommends working to improve communication and messaging to help people understand equity rather than retreat. She also advises leaders to shoulder the responsibility of addressing equity while their employees focus on inclusion.

Inclusion-first approaches could be strategic ways to signal up front that everyone is welcome to the table of EDI, according to Chavous. However, she maintains it is still important to define and pursue diversity, equity, and inclusion as distinct yet interrelated conditions that are important for advancing society.

Research supports the potential benefits of emphasizing inclusion for all groups, but it must be done with care and forethought. When done well, inclusive policies supporting both dominant and marginalized group members can increase dominant group members’ overall support for organizational diversity initiatives (Iyer, A., Social and Personality Psychology Compass, Vol. 16, No. 5, 2022opens in new window).

Focusing on inclusion may also generate positive reactions from marginalized groups, but it may backfire if not executed thoughtfully or if it appears superficial or performative, such as making public declarations that are not backed by concrete actions or policy changes. Other experts caution against EDI initiatives that implicitly capitulate to the preferences and comfort of dominant groups at the expense of nondominant groups. Not only do they make nondominant groups feel less safe, but they may also become less effectual overall (Plaut, V. C., et al. in Thomas, K. M. [Ed.], Diversity Resistance in Organizations, Routledge, 2020opens in new window).

Danielle Henderson, PhD, an adult clinical health psychologist at Indiana University Health (IU Health), uses a balanced approach. While the state of Indiana has passed legislation that restricts EDI initiativesopens in new window, particularly in higher education, IU Health has maintained its commitment to EDI, tailoring its work to comply with current legal limitations, according to Henderson. This approach balances targeted outreach to medically underserved communities with wider initiatives addressing the needs of diverse groups. For example, Henderson conducts monthly TV interviews to raise awareness about mental health among Central Indiana’s residents while also participating in narrower community initiatives that address inequities in maternal and cardiovascular health.

IU Health’s diversity training also encourages participants of all backgrounds to explore personal experiences of discrimination. “There are many different dimensions of diversity,” said Henderson. Working with all participants, regardless of identity “is a way to get buy-in and a fuller understanding of what EDI is,” said Henderson.

Ultimately, APA continues to champion the acronym EDI to emphasize equity as foundational to diversity and inclusion work. Using psychological science as a cornerstone of progress in equity, diversity, and inclusion has been the anchor of this work. APA will continue to advance EDI efforts by leading with the science to exert efforts toward long-term systemic change. As Washington said, “It’s about doing the work that you know is leading to the outcomes that we value and hope to see.”