Diversity, equity, and inclusion programs' emphasis on symbolism: Causes and consequences

Abstract

SummaryIn this article, we attempt to explain why diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs have become so widespread and central to organizations today. We propose that organizations have responded to powerful societal forces that emphasize the importance of diversity. Because achieving diversity is often difficult, organizations often emphasize the symbolic aspects of diversity, including mission statements on diversity and the creation of units to promote the organization's DEI reputation. This emphasis on diversity symbolism has led to some unintended and negative consequences. A major consequence is that organizations become vulnerable to the charge that they are engaging in “window dressing.” This charge can lead organizations to respond by setting even more difficult‐to‐achieve goals. We cite illustrative examples in which stakeholders have called on organizations to actually achieve diversity, prompting a new round of diversity‐related goal‐setting sometimes accompanied by legally questionable human resource procedures (e.g., preferential hiring). Another negative consequence of diversity symbolism is that it incentivizes a focus on surface rather than deep dimensions of diversity. This displacement of deep by surface level diversity may cause organization to forgo the advantages potentially afforded by the former relative to the latter. We suggest that the tradeoffs inherent in DEI warrant caution and realism in program implementation.