The Value of DEI in the Workplace

At the start of his second term, President Trump eliminated diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, thus marking a demoralizing start to his presidency. The Administration abolished these programs to ensure equal treatment and elevate the values of skill and talent in the workplace. However, like many of Trump’s actions, his fervor to appear like a man of action has led to short-sighted plans that will inevitably fly in the face of American interests, even interests he purports to value.

Executive Orders No. 14151 and No. 14173, signed January 20th and 21st respectively, called for an immediate end to any DEI programs within the federal government, agencies, contractors, and subcontractors. Order No. 14173 also ordered agencies to work along with the Attorney General to encourage an end to DEI practices in the private sector as well. As a result, many entities quickly eliminated their programs to avoid repercussions from the federal government.

Using terms such as “dangerous, demeaning, and immoral,” the executive orders revoked several previous orders that protected diversity within the workplace. Amongst these were Executive Order No. 11246, singed in 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson, which established non-discriminatory hiring practices and required affirmative action and fair treatment during employment.¹ It also revoked Executive Order No. 13672, signed in 2014 by President Barack Obama, which expanded Executive Order No. 11246 to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.² Trump’s executive orders claim that relying on race- and sex-based preferences “can violate the civil-rights laws of this Nation.” According to the orders, it is the policy of the U.S. to protect these rights and “to promote individual initiative, excellence, and hard work.”³

In other words, DEI initiatives are unconstitutional because they encourage hiring employees who fit a certain box based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or disability status over hiring employees who are the most qualified candidates for the position. This leads to unfair and unequal treatment of employees and therefore violates civil rights laws.

This is not how DEI initiatives work. In fact, hiring in this manner is illegal according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.⁴ DEI programs do not violate civil rights laws. They are the methodologies by which these laws are upheld. These programs are the procedures used by companies and hiring managers to ensure all candidates and employees receive fair and equal treatment. To eliminate DEI programs because they violate civil rights laws is akin to abolishing a construction plan to execute an architect’s design. They serve complementary, not opposing functions. When executed properly, DEI programs are the processes by which civil rights laws are upheld.

“DEI” refers to diversity, equity, and inclusion, a three-pronged approach aimed at ensuring qualified candidates join and grow within a company. Diversity refers to the varying backgrounds, identities, or abilities of the people who comprise a workforce.⁵ It also refers to the efforts made to find talent from a wider range of populations. According to Jessica Fulton, Vice President at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, “These policies don’t actually dictate who gest hired. They are ways to open doors to people who might not have access or aren’t as well-connected in an industry or occupation.” ⁶

David Glasgow, Executive Director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, explains that, “DEI enhances merit by saying, ‘How do we find the best people for the job or make sure we are promoting the best people?’”⁷ Diversity efforts are about “engaging in effective outreach to places that might be overlooked and making sure hiring and promotion systems aren’t screening out women or people of color from being considered.”⁸ It increases the pool of people considered, but it does not dictate who is the best candidate based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or disability alone.

Equity refers to the concept of closing disparities between people and ensuring that everyone has an even playing field.⁹ This can mean ensuring people receive the same pay for doing the same work or have the same opportunities for advancement and growth.¹⁰

Inclusion refers to the efforts made to create a community where diverse thoughts, perspectives, and backgrounds coexist in a healthy way.¹¹ It is about fostering an environment where people feel comfortable sharing their views, actively participating, and having healthy interactions with the people they work with. It also refers to efforts to ensure different voices are included and are involved in the decision-making process.¹² These three ideologies come together to create a framework that employers use to make sure everyone receives equal treatment.

America needs these programs because, despite our democratic values, America is not a classless country. Although it is a melting pot of different people, there is an unspoken hierarchy that tends to favor a certain race, a specific gender, a particular economic background, and a certain educational status over others. Throughout the last few decades there has been a concerted effort to find people who do not fit these favored categories because it has become increasingly apparent that talented people come from all different backgrounds, yet not everyone has access to the same opportunities. Civil rights laws require equal treatment of individuals; however, to achieve this, equity must play a role in bringing people to the same starting line. DEI is about creating an equal playing field “in a world where not everybody has an equal chance to exhibit their abilities.”¹³

In his book, The Panda’s Thumb, Stephen Jay Gould wrote, “I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.” These words perfectly exemplify why DEI programs are necessary within the American workplace. Many extremely qualified people have barriers to entry or experience the effects of deep-seated, institutionalized prejudices that bar them from accessing the same opportunities as others. Without DEI programs, these people may never find their foot in the door. Why should an entity settle for having one Einstein or even no Einsteins when it has a proven methodology for finding several? What organization wouldn’t want to seek talent where it has been proven to be found time and time again?

Furthermore, companies in the higher quartile of diversity financially outperform companies in the lower quartile according to a study by McKinsey.¹⁴ Having a workforce comprised of people with differing backgrounds, perspectives, experiences, education and abilities leads to diversity in thinking, seeing problems differently, creating new approaches, ideating outside the box, and innovating.¹⁵

As DEI programs end within the government and private sector, the pool of applicants will grow smaller and smaller as it becomes limited to people who have access. If reflective of the past, it is likely that access will only be granted to people with a certain background, educational association, or even just social connection, as we see in the Administration. This will likely lead to a like-minded work environment. When a work force becomes homogenous, there is a stagnation in the ability to see a problem differently, to adapt, to deal with conflict, to engage in discourse that leads to ground-breaking solutions, or to outpace competitors.¹⁶

In a less diverse environment, group thinking becomes stronger. Different or opposing mindsets that do not conform or receive majority support will likely be discouraged or stamped out.¹⁷ Without the “inclusion” aspects of DEI programs, people may not feel free to voice their opinions, which could lead to brilliant solutions or innovative ideas dying by the wayside.

This is not to say that people hired into companies without DEI programs are not intelligent, innovative, or worthy of their positions. It is simply the difference between having one Einstein on a team versus five Einsteins. The Administration is encouraging companies to settle for just one when there are many more out there. This type of short-sighted thinking inevitably will lead to stagnation.

Over the next few years, the companies that will succeed will be the ones that foster a healthy, dynamic work environment for their employees and that proactively seek talent instead of limiting their pool of candidates to only the people who have the capability to walk through the door. Companies like these will outpace others in the long run because they foster an environment where people actively contribute their talents, different perspectives, experiences, and skills towards a goal.

In a country that derives its strength from diversity and that values the richness of those varying perspectives, it is counterproductive to not foster DEI initiatives. To claim these programs violate civil rights laws or to think entities are better off eliminating them sets us back decades.

America is a place that recognizes the rights of its people and that takes measures to ensure fair and equal treatment. Trump’s ideas should not be entertained as viable options when they come at the cost of disrespecting people’s civil rights, liberties, privacy, autonomy, or worse, when they come at the cost of people’s lives. America has always derived its brilliance from the strength and diversity of its people, and in the face of these drastic Administrative changes, it is important to remember and stand up for that.

---

1. https://archives.federalregister.gov/issue_slice/1965/9/28/12315-12325.pdf

2. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/07/23/2014-17522/further-amendments-to-executive-order-11478-equal-employment-opportunity-in-the-federal-government

3. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-illegal-discrimination-and-restoring-merit-based-opportunity/

4. https://www.eeoc.gov/future-dei-disparate-impact-and-eo-11246-after-students-fair-admissions-v-harvardnc

5. https://odei.umich.edu/2024/04/18/dei-defined-what-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-really-means/

6. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dei-diversity-equity-inclusion-corporate-programs/

7. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dei-diversity-equity-inclusion-corporate-programs/

8. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dei-diversity-equity-inclusion-corporate-programs/

9. https://odei.umich.edu/2024/04/18/dei-defined-what-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-really-means/

10. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dei-diversity-equity-inclusion-corporate-programs/

11. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dei-diversity-equity-inclusion-corporate-programs/

12. https://odei.umich.edu/2024/04/18/dei-defined-what-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-really-means/

13. https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/22/us/dei-diversity-equity-inclusion-explained/index.html

14. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-matters-even-more-the-case-for-holistic-impact

15. https://neuroleadership.com/your-brain-at-work/why-diverse-teams-outperform-homogeneous-teams/

16. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dangers-pitfalls-homogeneous-workforce-paula-williams-swift-edd-wr9ve/

17. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dangers-pitfalls-homogeneous-workforce-paula-williams-swift-edd-wr9ve/