DEI Rollbacks Are Rising: Here’s What Your Organization Can’t Ignore
Over the past year, organizations across multiple industries have quietly—and sometimes not so quietly—scaled back or outright dismantled their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. What was once heralded as a critical driver of organizational success and brand reputation has now become the face of budget cuts, leadership eliminations, strategic de-prioritization, and public denouncements. The reasons for these rollbacks vary, from economic pressures and shifting political landscapes to an inability to articulate DEI’s impact or justify it as an evolving business priority.
As these changes unfold, one fundamental question remains: Who will do the work?
When I speak of "the work," I’m not referring to surface-level cultural programs, demographic benchmarks, or corporate statements. I am referring to strategic efforts that foster inclusive cultures, mitigate bias in decision-making, remove systemic barriers, and drive accountability. I am speaking of the work that creates psychologically safe spaces for learning, support, and engagement across differences— all while ensuring equitable access to opportunities for all. By stepping away from these commitments, organizational leaders must confront a critical reality: the need for DEI work does not disappear because one says it does not exist. Regardless of what it is called or how it is framed, organizations need a clear strategy for how former DEI led responsibilities will be managed—within legal and regulatory boundaries—or risk exposing critical gaps within their infrastructures that could directly impact their long-term success and sustainability. Below are a few areas that I suggest organizations should be monitoring or having a measurable strategy in place amid scale backs and eliminations.
Pictured above, John Turturro as "Irving" in Apple TV's Severance
Workforce Diversity
Without a clear commitment to inclusive hiring and advancement practices, organizations risk reverting to cultures where hiring decisions prioritize subjective “fit” over clear and objective merit. It is a strength to have a team that is built around genuinely authentic and varied experiences and perspectives to drive innovation, decision-making, and problem-solving. Research suggests that, even with DEI efforts in place, 69% of executives struggle to build these types of diverse teams. Without intentional accountability structures, recruitment, hiring, and promotion decisions may rely more on subjective factors like familiarity and comfort. This can reinforce workplace homogeneity and exclusion, increasing susceptibility to legal risks and oversight in key data points that drive informed decision-making. During this period, organizational leaders will have to strategically invest in attracting and retaining talent. My suggestion is to look inward and determine what encourages people to stay, why they left, and what actions can be derived from those responses.
Gender Pay Gap
In the U.S., women earn an average of 85 cents for every dollar earned by men, with even wider gaps for women of color. According to UN Women, globally, women only make 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. At this rate, with no disruptions or changes, we won’t see equal pay until 2069. If you’d like to advance the clock, then strategies will be needed to mitigate systemic pay disparities such as routine disaggregated audits and salary transparency initiatives. Without these mechanisms, organizations risk exacerbating inequities—leading to greater employee dissatisfaction, reputation damage, and potential legal consequences. I’d say this is also critical considering the growing trend of women’s representation in the workforce and how women between the ages of 25 to 34 are outpacing men in attaining bachelor’s degrees by around 10%.
Employee Engagement & Retention
The U.S. population and workforce are increasingly diversifying. Therefore, when employees—especially those from racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse backgrounds—witness DEI efforts being rolled back, the message is clear: This company does not prioritize inclusivity. That perception directly affects engagement, morale, and retention.
Consider these statistics:
Employees who feel they cannot be their authentic selves at work are 2.4 times more likely to quit.
56% of Black employees say they would not work for a company that does not prioritize DEI.
In my experience, “The difference between good and great organizations in employee engagement is that while they both can attract employees, great organizations excel in retaining them.” Without meaningful inclusion efforts and a strong cultural infrastructure of vertical and horizontal engagement, organizations risk alienating top talent—especially in industries where diverse perspectives drive innovation, problem-solving, and market competitiveness. Your culture is your litmus test and competitive advantage.
Turnover Costs
High turnover isn’t just a culture or a reputation issue—it is an expensive undertaking. Recruiting, onboarding, and training new employees requires time and resources, and lost productivity from poor retention can drain companies financially. As previously noted, diverse and inclusive companies have employee retention rates 5.4 times higher than non-inclusive companies. A glaring research point shows that organizations in the bottom quartile for both gender and ethnic diversity in executive teams are on average 66% less likely to financially outperform their competitors. And, according to a report by Accenture, when U.S. companies fail to foster inclusive work environments, they forfeit an estimated $1.05 trillion annually. Therefore, scaling back is not just a moral or reputation risk—it is an employee turnover financial liability. This serves as a segue to my next point.
Organizational Reputation & Market Perception
No matter the industry—whether healthcare, higher education, government, banking, or tech—organizations do not operate in a vacuum. Consumers, investors, students, job seekers, and employees pay close attention to how companies handle DEI. While complying with political and social pressure may be seen as a neutral move to avoid the possibility of future challenges, it can signal a shift that can damage public perception and erode stakeholder trust. It is still a little too early to understand the full national or global impact. However, we are witnessing what happens when companies that once touted public declarations for DEI are inconveniently positioned between opposing forces for their commitments. Take Target for instance, in 2020 Target stated they would step up their commitment to racial equity and diversity in response to the death of George Floyd. They would soon make public pledges to increase its Black workforce by 20% over the next three years, take other steps to advance racial equity, and spend more than $2 billion with Black-owned businesses by the end of 2025. Four years later, Target’s efforts were met with anti-DEI backlash which informed their decision to pivot their efforts. Since the announcement, Target has taken the following hits:
As this landscape evolves, we are likely only witnessing the beginning of heightened scrutiny and backlash. Organizations must stay vigilant, paying close attention to areas like strategic partnerships, market risk, and corporate responsibility. Navigating this shift will require leaders to make deliberate choices that reflect their values and long-term vision. The critical question they must ask is this: What is the true cost of complicity? The answer will shape not only how well organizations withstand the current season, but also their long-term viability in the face of more change. Regardless of personal stance, one fact remains... Society is increasingly diversifying, landscapes are becoming more complex, and organizations will either evolve to meet its needs or be rendered obsolete. In the meantime, be informed, be strategic, and above all, be prepared for the consequences. I hope this helps!! ✌🏾 + 🫶🏾
Thanks for reading! I’d love to hear your thoughts on this article. Did I miss anything? Do you have personal experiences or observations to add? Let me know!
Footnotes is a newsletter dedicated to exploring trends and strategies in diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging while also serving as a platform for me to re-engage with writing and stimulating meaningful conversations in this field. Your participation is greatly appreciated. Please note that the views and opinions expressed in these communications are solely my own and do not necessarily reflect those of any affiliated entities. Thank you for joining the discussion.
