Simplified abstract illustration of diversity, equity, and inclusion
In theUnited States,diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are organizational frameworks that seek to promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, particularly groups who have historically been underrepresented or subject todiscrimination based onidentity ordisability.[1] These three notions (diversity,equity, andinclusion) together represent "three closely linked values" which organizations seek to institutionalize through DEI frameworks.[2] The concepts predate this terminology and other variations sometimes include terms such asbelonging,justice, andaccessibility. As such, frameworks such asinclusion and diversity (I&D);[3]diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB);[4][5][6]justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI orEDIJ);[7][8] ordiversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (IDEA,DEIA, orDEAI)[9][10][11] exist. In theUnited Kingdom, the termequality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) is used in a similar way.
Diversity refers to the presence of variety within the organizational workforce in characteristics such asrace,gender,ethnicity,sexual orientation,disability,age,culture,class,veteran status, orreligion.[2][12]Equity refers to concepts offairness andjustice, such as fair compensation andsubstantive equality.[12] More specifically,equity usually also includes a focus onsocietal disparities and allocating resources and "decision making authority to groups that have historically been disadvantaged",[13] and taking "into consideration a person's unique circumstances, adjusting treatment accordingly so that the end result is equal."[2] Finally,inclusion refers to creating an organizational culture that creates an experience where "all employees feel their voices will be heard",[2] and a sense of belonging and integration.[12][14]
DEI policies are often used by managers to increase the productivity and collaborative efforts of their workforce and to reinforce positive communication.[15] While DEI is most associated with non-elected government or corporate environments, it's commonly implemented within many types of organizations, such ascharitable organizations,academia,schools, andhospitals.[16][17] DEI policies often include certain training efforts, such asdiversity training.
DEI efforts and policies have generated criticism and controversy, some directed at the specific effectiveness of its tools, such as diversity training; its effect on free speech and academic freedom, as well as more broadly attracting criticism on political or philosophical grounds. In addition, the term "DEI" has gained traction as anethnic slur towards minority groups in the United States.[18][19]
Early DEI efforts included preferential hiring and treatment of veterans of theUS Civil War, their widows, and orphans, in 1865.[20] In 1876, this was amended to give preference to veterans during aReduction in Force. In 1921 and 1929, executive orders by presidentsCoolidge andHarding established ten-point preference for veterans towards exams and hiring criteria for federal employment.[21][22] In 1944, theVeterans' Preference Act codified the previous executive orders, clarified criteria, and included special hiring provisions for disabled veterans. Later amendments added veterans from conflicts after World War II, special provisions for the mothers of disabled or deceased veterans, and job-specific training for veterans entering the federal or private workforce.[23]
In 1936,President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed theRandolph-Sheppard Act, which mandated the federal government to give preference to purchase products made by the blind, and established the Committee on Purchases of Blind Made Products. The 1971Javits–Wagner–O'Day Act[24] expanded the Randolph-Sheppard act and changed the name to The Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled (now AbilityOne). Blind-made products are used throughout the federal government, and include brands such asSkillcraft,ARC Diversified,Austin Lighthouse, andAbility One.
Other DEI policies includeAffirmative Action.[25] The legal term "affirmative action" was first used in "Executive Order No. 10925",[26] signed by PresidentJohn F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961, which included a provision thatgovernment contractors "takeaffirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated [fairly] during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin".[27] It was used to promote actions that achieve non-discrimination. In September 1965, PresidentLyndon Johnson issuedExecutive Order 11246 which required government employers to "hire without regard to race, religion and national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin."[28] The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.[29] Neither executive order nor The Civil Rights Act authorized group preferences. The Senate floor manager of the bill, SenatorHubert Humphrey, declared that the bill “would prohibit preferential treatment for any particular group” adding “I will eat my hat if this leads to racial quotas.”[30]
More recently, concepts have moved beyond discrimination to include diversity, equity, and inclusion as motives for preferring historically underrepresented groups. In the famousBakke decision of 1978,Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, diversity became a constitutional law factor. The Supreme Court ruled that quotas were illegal, but it was allowable to consider race as a plus factor when trying to foster "diversity" in their classes.[31][32]
Diversity themes gained momentum in the mid-1980s. At a time when PresidentRonald Reagan discussed dismantling equality and affirmative action laws in the 1980s, equality and affirmative action professionals employed by American firms along with equality consultants, engaged in establishing the argument that a diverse workforce should be seen as a competitive advantage rather than just as a legal constraint. Their message was not to promote diversity because it is a legal mandate but because it is good for business. From then on, researchers started to test a number of hypotheses on the business benefits of diversity and diversity management, known as the business case of diversity.[33]
In 1990, PresidentGeorge H.W. Bush signed theAmericans with Disabilities Act, which requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities, and imposes accessibility requirements on public accommodations. PresidentBill Clinton signed the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act in 1998. It helps eligible veterans access federal job opportunities by allowing them to compete for positions typically open only to current federal employees and by reinforcing veterans' preference in hiring. It also protects veterans from discrimination in federal employment and provides a process for addressing violations of their rights.[34]
By 2003, corporations spent $8 billion annually on diversity.[35] In 2009, in response to calls for the US government to do more for disabled veterans returning from the conflicts inIraq and Afghanistan PresidentBarack Obama signed executive order 13518, which established the Veterans Employment Initiative to enhance recruitment and retention of veterans in the federal workforce by creating a comprehensive framework to support their transition into civilian employment. It directed federal agencies to increase veteran hiring (especially disabled veterans), set goals for improvement, and establish the Veterans Employment Program Office to provide assistance and resources for veterans in civilian employment.[36] In 2011,Barack Obama signedExecutive Order 13583 concerning diversity and inclusion.[37] After theelection of Donald Trump in 2016 and the ascent of the#MeToo andBlack Lives Matter movements,Time magazine stated in 2019 that the DEI industry had "exploded" in size.[38] Within academia, a 2019 survey found that spending on DEI efforts had increased 27 percent over the five preceding academic years.[39]
In support of DEI hiring during the first term ofDonald Trump, the Office of Civil Rights of theFederal Aviation Authority FAA on Thursday, April 11, 2019, announced a pilot program to help prepare people with disabilities for careers in air traffic operations, which identifies specific opportunities for people with targeted disabilities, to facilitate their entry into a more "diverse and inclusive" workforce in a standard public opening for air traffic controller jobs at theAir Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) with the potential to be appointed to a temporaryATCS position at the FAA Academy.[40]
One 2020 estimate placed the size of the global diversity and inclusion market at $7.5 billion, of which $3.4 billion was in the United States, projecting it to reach $17.2 billion by 2027.[41]
In 2023, The Supreme Court explicitly rejected affirmative action regarding race in college admissions inStudents for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. The Court held that affirmative action programs "lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful endpoints. We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today".[44][45][46]
As of 2024,affirmative action in the United States had been increasingly replaced by emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion, while nine[47] states explicitly banned affirmative action use in the employment process.[48][49]
In January 2025, PresidentDonald Trump called DEI efforts "illegal and immoral discrimination programs" and "public waste" in hisJanuary 20 executive order,[57] rescindedExecutive Order 11246 on January 21,[58] demanding that all governmental DEI programs be shut down by January 23, and placed employees on administrative leave and eventual layoff.[59][60]
In early February 2025, a lawsuit was filed against Trump's executive orders, arguing that they were unconstitutional.[61] In March, theUnited States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit paused the lower court's nationwidepreliminary injunction and permitted the enforcement of the executive orders pending the outcome of the appeal.[62]
References to women, people of color, and LGBTQ individuals have been scrubbed from federal websites,[63][64] image archives,[65] and physical installations.[66] As described byBrenda Sue Fulton, "[this] administration has hung a sign outside the armed forces saying if you're not a white male, you are no longer welcome."[63]
U.S. government departments have ordered probes of organizations that practice DEI, including hospitals, universities, federal contractors,[67][68] and media companies.[69] They have also pressured foreign companies with U.S. government contracts to comply with the order, drawing ire from foreign officials.[70][71][72][73]
Affirmative action is intended to promote the opportunities of defined minority groups within a society to give themequal access to that of the majority population.[74] The philosophical basis of the policy has various rationales, including but not limited to compensation for past discrimination, correction of current discrimination, and the diversification of society.[75] It is often implemented in governmental and educational settings to ensure that designated groups within a society can participate in all promotional, educational, and training opportunities.[76]
The stated justification for affirmative action by its proponents is to help compensate for past discrimination, persecution orexploitation by the ruling class of a culture,[77] and to address existing discrimination.[78] In a business environment, increased workforce diversity has been found to be associated with increased performance.[79]
In a 2018 article, proponents of DEI argued that because businesses and corporations exist within a larger world, they cannot be completely separated from the issues that exist in society. Therefore, the authors argue the need for DEI to improve coworker relations and teamwork.[80]
As of 2022, many academic institutions in the US have also started making commitments to DEI in different ways, including creating documents, programs and appointing dedicated staff members especially in the US.[81][82] Many accreditation agencies now require supporting DEI.[83][84] As of 2014, information on DEI for both students and professors was widespread in colleges and universities, with many schools requiring training and meetings on the topic. Many scholarships and opportunities at universities even have a secondary purpose of encouraging diversity. Diversity in higher education can be difficult, with diverse students often feeling reduced to fulfilling a "diversity quota", which can carry a high emotional tax.[85]
Within healthcare, DEI reflective groups have been used to enhance the cultural sensitivity within mental health professionals. Such reflective spaces help improve mental health professionals' reflexivity and awareness of DEI-related issues both within direct clinical work with clients, their families, and wider systems, as well as within professional supervision and teams.[86]
Diversity management as a concept appeared and gained momentum in the US in the mid-1980s. Equality and affirmative action professionals employed by US firms along with equality consultants, engaged in establishing the argument that a diverse workforce should be seen as acompetitive advantage rather than just as a legal constraint. Their message was: do not promote diversity because it is a legal mandate, but because it is good for business.[87]
Following themurder of George Floyd in 2020, some companies made substantial commitments to racial equity by establishing dedicated diversity, equity, and inclusion teams.[88] In early 2024, theWashington Post reported that there is a trend in corporate America to reduce DEI positions and delegate the work to external consultants.[88] The number of DEI jobs reached its highest point in early 2023, but subsequently decreased by 5 percent that year and has further shrunk by 8 percent in 2024. The attrition rate for DEI roles has been approximately twice as high as that of non-DEI positions.[88] Companies that rolled back their DEI initiatives cited the 2023 Supreme Court's decision inStudents for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and similar actions of other companies.[89][90] The scaling back of DEI initiatives has aligned with a rise in legal challenges and political opposition to systematic endeavors aimed at enhancing racial equity. Diversity management can be seen to "leverage organisational diversity to enhance organisational justice and achieve better business outcomes".[91]
Several reports and academic studies have found a correlation between financial benefits and DEI.[92][93][94] At an aggregate level, a 2013 study found that birth country diversity of the labor force positively impacts a nation's long term productivity and income.[95] Firm-level research has provided conditional support to the proposal that workforce diversity per se brings business benefits with it. In short, whether diversity pays off or not depends on environmental factors, internal or external to the firm.[96][97][98][99] Recent work published in 2024 showed that there is a plausibly causal link (not only a correlation) between workforce gender diversity and financial performance in major firms.[100]
Research suggests that attempts to promote diversity can provoke defensive responses: One study suggested that even incidental allusions to diversity during interviews promoted defensive reactions in White male applicants. Indeed, after diversity was mentioned, their performance during the interview deteriorated and their physiological arousal increased.[101]
Since 2023, Republican-dominated US state legislatures have considered bills against DEI efforts, primarily at state colleges and universities.[105][106] That change has been taking place amid heavy legal pressures. The Supreme Court in June 2023 upended equal protection law with its decision inStudents for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, eliminating the use of affirmative action in college admissions but did not directly affect employers. Since then conservative activists organized in the states to dismantle race-conscious policies in various aspects of the economy.[107][108]
TheChronicle of Higher Education has tracked over 80 bills introduced in state legislatures since 2023.[109][106][110] Of these eight have become law, 25 failed to pass, and the rest are pending. Two bills became law in Florida and Texas; and one each in North Carolina, North Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah. Florida now prohibits public colleges from requiring “political loyalty tests” as a condition of employment, admission, or promotion. The other Florida law prohibits public colleges from spending state or federal funds on DEI unless required by federal law. One Texas law prohibits DEI practices or programs, including training, that are not in compliance with the state Constitution regarding equality. The other law bans DEI offices and staff, as well as mandatory diversity training. It also bans identity-based diversity statements that give preference regarding race or sex.[106]
In 2020, several prominent actors and directors criticized diversity standards, such as at theAcademy Awards. Beginning in 2024, to be eligible for a best-picture nomination at the Academy Awards, a film must meet two of four diversity standards in order to qualify.[111]
In 2023, ActorRichard Dreyfuss stated the Academy Award's diversity and inclusion standards "make me vomit", arguing that art should not be morally legislated.[112] Several major film directors, who are voting members of the Academy Awards, anonymously expressed their opposition to the new diversity standards toThe New York Post, with one describing them as "contrived".[113] Film criticArmond White attacked the new standards as "progressive fascism", comparing them to theHays Code.[114]
In 2021,Conservative media sources, such asNational Review, have been frequent critics of DEI, with contributor George Leff arguing it is authoritarian and anti-meritocratic.[115]
In the 2020s, DEI came into the spotlight in American politics, especially in state legislatures in Texas and otherRepublican-controlled states.[116] Several states are considering or have passed legislation targeting DEI in public institutions. In March 2023, theTexas House of Representatives passed a bill with a rider banning the use of state funds for DEI programs in universities and colleges.[117] In May 2023,Texas passed legislation banning offices and programs promoting DEI at publicly funded colleges and universities.[118][119] InIowa, a bill to ban spending on DEI in public universities was also advanced in March 2023.[120]
After the 2024 election, DEI has also produced a growing divide inside the Democratic Party.[124] Rep.Adam Smith, ranking Democrat on theU.S. House Committee on Armed Services, for instance, stated that DEI efforts go "off the beam, to my mind, when they imply that racism, bigotry and settler colonialism is the unique purview of white people. ... You don't need to imply that all white people are racists, and that all white people are oppressors".[125]
Another significant point of political controversy has been the implementation of DEI frameworks in the military, with Republican politicians frequently criticizing the efforts as "divisive" and as harming military efficiency and recruiting, while Democrats have defended it as beneficial and strengthening.[126] In July 2023, theHouse of Representatives voted to ban all DEI offices and initiatives within thePentagon and military along partisan lines, with all Democrats and four Republican members also opposing. The Senate, under Democratic control, has not acted.[127][128]Students for Fair Admissions, which successfully challenged race-based admissions in public universities in a2023 Supreme Court case, sued the military academies after the Court excluded those institutions from its ruling. In April 2025, U.S. military academies ended affirmative action in admissions.[129][130]
Political opposition to corporate DEI efforts in the United States, particularly marketing criticized as "woke", have led to calls for boycotts of certain companies by activists and politicians; with notable examples beingDisney,Target,Anheuser-Busch,[131] andChick-fil-A.[132][133] CommentatorJonathan Turley ofThe Hill described such boycotts as resulting "some success".[134]
Some of these companies' responses to the controversies have, in turn, sparked criticism fromprogressives of walking back or failing DEI commitments.[135][136]
A June 2024 poll byThe Washington Post andIpsos found that 6 in 10 Americans believed that diversity, equity, and inclusion programs are "a good thing".[137] A September 2024 poll by theHuman Rights Campaign found that 80% ofLGBTQ Americans would boycott a company that repealed its DEI programs and 19% would quit their job if their place of employment did.[138]
A 2025 poll byAxios found that more than 50% of Americans across all demographics surveyed said that DEI initiatives had made "no impact" on their jobs. Of those who said it did have an impact, a majority in almost all demographics said DEI had "benefited" their job rather than "hindered" it.[139]
According toThe Chronicle of Higher Education, institutions are making defensive adjustments to the criticism. Some schools are removing the word "diversity" from titles of offices and jobs; some are closing campus spaces set up for students according to identity; some are ending diversity training; and some have stopped asking all faculty and staff members for written affirmations of their commitment to diversity.[140]
Diversity training, a common tool used in DEI efforts, has repeatedly come under criticism as being ineffective or even counterproductive.[141][43][142][143]The Economist has stated that "the consensus now emerging among academics is that many anti-discrimination policies have no effect. What is worse, they often backfire."[43] A regular claim is that these efforts mainly work to protect againstlitigation.[43][144] A 2007 study of 829 companies over 31 years showed "no positive effects in the average workplace" from diversity training, while the effect was negative where it was mandatory.[144] According toHarvard University professor in sociology and diversity researcher Frank Dobbin, "[O]n average, the typical all-hands-on-deck, 'everybody has to have diversity training' – that typical format in big companies doesn't have any positive effects on any historically underrepresented groups like black men or women, Hispanic men or women, Asian-American men or women or white women."[142]
Contrary arguments for training are that, "implicit bias training is crucial for addressing racism, and bypassing it cannot be justified under the First Amendment. While free speech is a fundamental right, it is not absolute and must be balanced against public health needs, including combating systemic racism."[145]
The use of mandatory "diversity statements" within academia, wherein an applicant or faculty member outlines their "past contributions" and plans "for advancing diversity, equity and inclusion" if hired, has become controversial and sparked criticism.[146] Diversity statements have been a part of some academic hiring processes since at least 2001.[147]
According to a 2022 survey conducted by theAmerican Association of University Professors, one in five American colleges and universities include DEI criteria intenure standards, including 45.6% of institutions with more than 5000 students.[148] Some universities have begun to weigh diversity statements heavily in hiring processes. For example,University of California, Berkeley eliminated three-quarters of applicants for five faculty positions in thelife sciences on the basis of their diversity statements in the hiring cycle of 2018–2019.[149][147]
A 1,500-person survey conducted byFoundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) reported that the issue is highly polarizing for faculty members, with half saying their view more closely aligns with the description of diversity statements as "a justifiable requirement for a job at a university", while the other half saw it as "an ideologicallitmus test that violates academic freedom".[150] According to ProfessorRandall L. Kennedy atHarvard University, "It would be hard to overstate the degree to which many academics at Harvard and beyond feel intense and growing resentment against the DEI enterprise because of features that are perhaps most evident in the demand for DEI statements", adding "I am a scholar on the left committed to struggles for social justice. The realities surrounding mandatory DEI statements, however, make me wince".[151]
Several U.S. states have implemented legislation to ban mandatory diversity statements.[150] In 2024, MIT announced that diversity statements "will no longer be part of applications for any faculty positions" at the university, becoming the first major university to abandon the practice.[152]
According to the University of Iowa DEI framework, "equity is different than equality in that equality implies treating everyone as if their experiences are exactly the same."[153] A common identification, especially among critics, is ofequality as meaning "equality of opportunities" andequity as "equality of outcome".[154][155] This difference between equity and equality is also calledDilemma of Difference.[156]
The 2023 suicide of formerToronto principal Richard Bilkszto led to a new wave of controversy surrounding DEI in the workplace and its impact on freedom of expression.[162][163] Bilkszto had earlier filed a lawsuit against theToronto District School Board in the wake of a 2021 incident at a DEI training seminar; Bilkszto was later diagnosed with "anxiety secondary to a workplace event", and claimed the session and its aftermath had destroyed his reputation. Bilkszto's lawyer has publicly linked this incident and its aftermath with his death.[162][163] In the wake of Bilkszto's death,Ontario Minister of EducationStephen Lecce stated he had asked for a review and "options to reform professional training and strengthen accountability on school boards so this never happens again", calling Bilkszto's allegations before his death "serious and disturbing".[162] Bilkszto's death generated international attention and renewed debate on DEI and freedom of speech.[164][165] According toThe Globe and Mail, the incident has also been "seized on by a number of prominentright-wing commentators looking to roll-back [DEI] initiatives."[163] The anti-racism trainer involved in the incident has stated they welcome the review by Lecce, and stated that the incident has been "weaponized to discredit and suppress the work of people committed [to DEI]".[162][163]
DEI has been criticized for not focusing onantisemitism.[166][167][168] According to Andria Spindel of the Canadian Antisemitism Education Foundation, antisemitism has been largely ignored in the DEI curriculum.[169]
Tabia Lee, a former DEI director atDe Anza College inCalifornia and DEI critic, has criticized DEI for what she says is fostering antisemitism.[170][171] According to theBrandeis Center, the DEI committee atStanford University said that "Jews, unlike other minority group[s], possess privilege and power, Jews and victims of Jew-hatred do not merit or necessitate the attention of the DEI committee" after two students complained about antisemitic incidents on campus.[172]
According to some critics, DEI initiatives inadvertently sideline disabled people. Writing forThe Conversation in 2017, college professor Stephen Friedman said that, "Organizations who are serious about DEI must adopt the frame of producing shared value where business and social goods exist side-by-side".[173][relevant?] According to aTime article in 2023, "People with disabilities are being neglected".[174]
This view has been echoed by a number of DEI leaders and activists.Sara Hart Weir, the former president and CEO of theNational Down Syndrome Society and co-founder of the Commission for Disability Employment, argues that when deliberating on the vision of DEI success in the United States, policymakers, and employers need to take proactive measures to engaging with people with disabilities who they historically ignored.[175] Corinne Gray has argued that, "If you embrace diversity, but ignore disability, you're doing it wrong."[176]
"Diversity hire",[177] "equity hire",[178][179] or "DEI hire",[180] are disparaging and controversial labels for persons fromunderrepresented groups, which are, according to this label, assumed to be less qualified and have supposedly received preferential treatment due to DEI policies. Wording of some DEI initiatives can backfire and contribute to the self-perception of the hired person that they would not have been hired solely based onformal merit and have only been hired due to a combination of their underrepresented identity and formal merit.[181] The term "diversity hire" can refer to problematic hiring strategies such astokenism.[177] The term "DEI", when used as a term to disparage people (particularly Black Americans), has been described as anethnic slur.[18][19]
DEI issues, sometimes with different terminology, are of concern in numerous countries around the world in the 21st century.[182]
In Australian workplaces, DEI initiatives primarily address gender and Indigenous inclusion, while comparatively less emphasis is placed on disability, LGBTQ+, and socio-economic diversity.[183]
In Japan and Iceland, DEI efforts often concentrate on gender and age equality.[184]
India prioritizes addressing workplace biases stemming from the patriarchal system,caste system, and religion.[185]
Many African countries focus on workplace inequality arising from theintersectionality of gender, ethnicity, and socio-economic backgrounds.[185]
Nordic countries face challenges due to cultural norms like theLaw of Jante, which can create a positivity bias and hinder acknowledgment of inequality.[185]
Merit, excellence, and intelligence (MEI) – framework that emphasizes selecting candidates based solely on their merit, achievements, skills, abilities, intelligence and contributions
^Rosenkranz, Kari M.; Arora, Tania K.; Termuhlen, Paula M.; Stain, Steven C.; Misra, Subhasis; Dent, Daniel; Nfonsam, Valentine (July 2021). "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Medicine: Why It Matters and How do We Achieve It?".Journal of Surgical Education.78 (4):1058–1065.doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.013.PMID33279427.S2CID227521028.
^See the concluding chapter, "Demise of Affirmative Action in the Age of Diversity," in Terry H. Anderson,The Pursuit of Fairness: A History of Affirmative Action (2004) pp. 217–273.
^Kushwaha, Ravindra Kumar; Yadav, Pradeep Kumar; Kushwaha, Abhiram; Dwivedi, Dr Pratyanshi (16 September 2024). "18".Diversity, Equity & Inclusion. Blue Rose Publishers.Archived from the original on 7 March 2025. Retrieved28 February 2025 – via Google Books.
^Steven M. Gillon, "The strange career of affirmative action: the Civil Rights Act of 1964" in his "That's Not What We Meant to Do": Reform and Its Unintended Consequences in Twentieth-Century America (WW Norton, 2000) p. 152.
^The Court ruled: “The diversity that furthers a compelling state interest encompasses a far broader array of qualifications and characteristics of which racial or ethnic origin is but a single though important element," quoted in Brent K., Nakamura, and Lauren B. Edelman, "Bakke at 40: How diversity matters in the employment context."UC Davis Law Review 52 (2018): 2627–2679 at p. 2629.onlineArchived 14 January 2024 at theWayback Machine
^Erin Kelly, and Frank Dobbin, "How affirmative action became diversity management: Employer response to antidiscrimination law, 1961 to 1996."American Behavioral Scientist 41.7 (1998): 960–984.online[permanent dead link]
^abSweeting, Karen D. (2023). "Executive Orders: Mandating Inclusion in the Federal Workplace: Insights from Federal Executive Departments' Strategic Plans".Public Personnel Management.52 (4):590–623.doi:10.1177/00910260231187542.ISSN0091-0260.
^Bridget Read, "Reckoning with as Reckoning: Doing the Work at Work What are companies desperate for diversity consultants actually buying?"New York: The Cut, May 26, 2021onlineArchived 26 July 2023 at theWayback Machine.
^Ariana Baio, "Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action, banning colleges from factoring race in admissions: In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled higher education institutions may not consider race as a factor in admissions"The Independent (29 June 2023)onlineArchived 29 June 2023 at theWayback Machine
^Dan Morgan, "Supreme Court rejects affirmative action at colleges as unconstitutional"CNBC June 29, 2023onlineArchived 29 June 2023 at theWayback Machine
^Cara McClellan, "When Claims Collide: Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and the Meaning of Discrimination."U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper 23-20 (2023).onlineArchived 14 February 2024 at theWayback Machine
^Appleby, Chloe; Bryant, Jessica (22 May 2024). Long, Rebecca (ed.)."Anti-DEI Legislation Tracker".www.bestcolleges.com.Archived from the original on 20 January 2025. Retrieved11 January 2025.
^Nino Monea, "Next on the Chopping Block: The Litigation Campaign against Race-Conscious Policies Beyond Affirmative Action in University Admissions." (SSRN 4440549, 2023)online
^Schwarzschild, Maimon and Heriot, Gail L., Race Preferences, Diversity, and Students for Fair Admissions: A New Day, a New Clarity (January 16, 2024). SMU Law Review, Forthcoming (2024), San Diego Legal Studies Paper No. 24-003,online
^Michelle L. Price, Zeke Miller (22 January 2025)."Trump's orders to end DEI programs reflect his push for a profound cultural shift".Associated Press. Retrieved31 January 2025.(...) Hours after taking the oath of office, the president signed an executive order ending diversity, equity and inclusion programs within the federal government, which he and conservatives have long condemned as discriminatory. His administration then moved Tuesday to end affirmative action in federal contracting — a move first required by President Lyndon Johnson — and ordered all federal diversity, equity and inclusion staff be put on paid leave and eventually laid off.
^Hunt, Vivian; Dennis Layton; Sara Prince (2015)."Diversity matters"(PDF).McKinsey & Company 1.1. pp. 15–29.Archived(PDF) from the original on 15 May 2024. Retrieved19 May 2024.
^Smulowitz, Stephen; Becerra, Manuel; Mayo, Margarita (October 2019). "Racial diversity and its asymmetry within and across hierarchical levels: The effects on financial performance".Human Relations.72 (10):1671–1696.doi:10.1177/0018726718812602.
^Bell, Myrtle P.; Berry, Daphne P. (November 2007). "Viewing Diversity Through Different Lenses: Avoiding a Few Blind Spots".Academy of Management Perspectives.21 (4):21–25.doi:10.5465/AMP.2007.27895336.
^Dwyer, Sean; Richard, Orlando C; Chadwick, Ken (December 2003). "Gender diversity in management and firm performance: the influence of growth orientation and organizational culture".Journal of Business Research.56 (12):1009–1019.doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00329-0.
^Richard, O. C.; Barnett, T.; Dwyer, S.; Chadwick, K. (1 April 2004). "Cultural diversity in management, firm performance, and the moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation dimensions".Academy of Management Journal.47 (2):255–266.JSTOR20159576.
^Dover, Tessa L.; Major, Brenda; Kaiser, Cheryl R. (January 2016). "Members of high-status groups are threatened by pro-diversity organizational messages".Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.62:58–67.doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.006.ISSN0022-1031.
^abcChronicle Staff, "DEI Legislation Tracker: Explore where college diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts are under attack"Chronicle of Higher Education February 16, 2024.
^Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, "State Legislatures Targeting DEI in Higher Education" (Jun 29, 2023)onlineArchived 27 January 2024 at theWayback Machine
^Heald, Rebecca; Wildermuth, Mary."Initiative to Advance Faculty Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Life Science at UC Berkeley"(PDF).ofew.berkeley.edu. University of California, Berkeley. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 26 March 2023. Retrieved16 June 2023.A total of 993 applications were received, of which 893 met basic qualifications. The LSI Committee conducted a first review and evaluated candidates based solely on contributions to diversity, equity and inclusion. Only candidates that met a high standard in this area were advanced for further review, narrowing the pool down to 214 for serious consideration. The remaining applications were then opened to review by the departmental ad-hoc search committees for short-list consideration.
^abHughes, Anne K.; Horner, Pilar S.; Ortiz, Daniel Vélez (2012). "Being the Diversity Hire: Negotiating Identity in an Academic Job Search".Journal of Social Work Education.48 (3):595–612.doi:10.5175/JSWE.2012.201000101.ISSN1043-7797.
^Baksh, Amilah (2 January 2024). ""She didn't mean it that way": theorizing gendered Islamophobia in academia".Race Ethnicity and Education.27 (1). Routledge:39–54.doi:10.1080/13613324.2023.2268318.ISSN1361-3324.
^Judy Tsui, and Gaoguang Zhou, "National Culture and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion." inWhy Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Matter: Challenges and Solutions (2024) pp.117–137.
^"EquiNations: How do DE&I regulations differ across countries?"EDGE Standards and Certification (July 6, 2023.)onlineArchived 15 February 2025 at theWayback Machine
Abu-Laban, Yasmeen, and Christina Gabriel.Selling diversity: Immigration, multiculturalism, employment equity, and globalization (U of Toronto Press, 2002), DEI in Canadaonline; see symposium on the book atCanadian Ethnic Studies 55.1 (2023): 125–145.
Anand, Rohini.Leading Global Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (2021), for multinational companies
Anderson, Terry H.The pursuit of fairness: a history of affirmative action (Oxford University Press, 2004), a standard scholarly history.
April, Kurt. "The new diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) realities and challenges."HR: The new agenda (2021): 119–132.online
Arsel, Zeynep, David Crockett, and Maura L. Scott. "Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the Journal of Consumer Research: A curation and research agenda."Journal of Consumer Research 48.5 (2022): 920–933.online
Barnett, Rachel. "Leading with meaning: Why diversity, equity, and inclusion matters in US higher education."Perspectives in Education 38.2 (2020): 20–35.online
Bendl, Regina, et al. eds.The Oxford handbook of diversity in organizations (Oxford UP, 2015)online
Byrd, Marilyn Y., and Chaunda L. Scott, eds.Diversity in the workforce: Current issues and emerging trends. (2024).online
Davis, Dr. Shirley.Diversity, Equity & Inclusion For Dummies (2022), wide-ranging manual to help new DEI officials in corporations.
Dobbin, Frank.Inventing equal opportunity (Princeton UP, 2009), scholarly history argues that Congress and the courts followed the lead of programs created by corporations.
Duarte, Melina et al. eds.Gender Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Academia: A Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Transformations (2024)online
"Elkins, Caroline, Frances Frei, and Anne Morriss. "Critics of D.E.I. Forget That It Works: Guest Essay,"New York Times Jan 21, 2024.
Ferraro, Carla, Alicia Hemsley, and Sean Sands. "Embracing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI): Considerations and opportunities for brand managers."Business Horizons 66.4 (2023): 463–479.[1]
Fleming, Robert S. "Diversity, equity, and inclusion." inPreparing for a Successful Faculty Career: Achieving Career Excellence as a Faculty Member (Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024). 157–159.doi:10.1007/978-3-031-50161-6_35
Harrison, David A., et al. "Understanding attitudes toward affirmative action programs in employment: Summary and meta-analysis of 35 years of research."Journal of Applied Psychology 91#5 (2006): 1013+online.
Holzer, Harry, and David Neumark. "Assessing affirmative action."Journal of Economic Literature 38.3 (2000): 483–568; summary of 200 studies on the actual effects.online
Iyer, Aarti. "Understanding advantaged groups' opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies: The role of perceived threat."Social and Personality Psychology Compass 16.5 (2022): e12666.online
King, Eden B. , Quinetta M. Roberson, and Mikki R. Hebl, eds.Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Insights in Practice (Oxford University Press, 2024)
Kraus, Michael W., Brittany Torrez, and LaStarr Hollie. "How narratives of racial progress create barriers to diversity, equity, and inclusion in organizations."Current opinion in psychology 43 (2022): 108–113.online
Monea, Nino. "Next on the Chopping Block: The Litigation Campaign against Race-Conscious Policies Beyond Affirmative Action in University Admissions." (SSRN 4440549, 2023)online
Nakamura, Brent K., and Lauren B. Edelman. "Bakke at 40: How diversity matters in the employment context."UC Davis Law Review 52 (2018): 2627–2679.online
Pierce, Jennifer.Racing for innocence: Whiteness, gender, and the backlash against affirmative action (Stanford University Press, 2012).online
Portocarrero, Sandra, and James T. Carter. "Diversity initiatives in the US workplace: A brief history, their intended and unintended consequences."Sociology Compass 16.7 (2022): e13001.online
Reza, Fawzia.Diversity and Inclusion in Educational Institutions (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2022)
Roberson, Quinetta M. ed.The Oxford Handbook of Diversity and Work (2013)online
Rubio, Philip F.A History of Affirmative Action, 1619–2000 (University Press of Mississippi, 2001), a Black perspective
Russell, Princess M. "From Affirmative Action to Diversity and Inclusion: Exploring Diversification Efforts among African American Faculty at Ivy League Universities in a State of Anti-affirmative Action Regulatory Environment" (EdD dissertation, Northcentral University; ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2022. 28964683).
Russen, Michelle, and Mary Dawson. "Which should come first? Examining diversity, equity and inclusion."International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 36.1 (2024): 25–40.online
Sanger, Catherine Shea et al. eds.International Diversity and Inclusion: Innovative Higher Education in Asia (Palgrave MacMillan. 2020)
Schwarzschild, Maimon and Heriot, Gail L. "Race Preferences, Diversity, and Students for Fair Admissions: A New Day, a New Clarity" (January 16, 2024). SMU Law Review, Forthcoming (2024), San Diego Legal Studies Paper No. 24-003,online
Sherry, Suzanna. "DEI and Antisemitism: Bred in the Bone"Vanderbilt University Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series Working Paper Number 24-4 (January 23, 2024).online
Smithsimon, Gregory.Liberty Road: Black Middle-Class Suburbs and the Battle Between Civil Rights and Neoliberalism (NYU Press, 2022)online.
Soucek, Brian. "Diversity Statements."UC Davis Law Review 55#4 (2021): 1989–2062. Controversy regarding statements required of university faculty.online
Stephenson, Jacqueline H. et al. eds.Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion in Caribbean Organisations and Society: An Exploration of Work, Employment, Education, and the Law (Springer International, 2020)
Tatli, Ahu. "A multi‐layered exploration of the diversity management field: diversity discourses, practices and practitioners in the UK."British Journal of Management 22.2 (2011): 238–253.
Tavares, Vander, et al. eds.Critical and Creative Engagements with Diversity in Nordic Education (Lexington, 2023)
Taylor, Alecia. "3 Ways That Anti-DEI Efforts Are Changing How Colleges Operate"Chronicle of Higher Education (January 18, 2024)
Thurber, Timothy M. "Racial Liberalism, Affirmative Action, and the Troubled History of the President's Committee on Government Contracts."Journal of Policy History 18.4 (2006): 446–476.
Urofsky, Melvin I.The Affirmative Action Puzzle: A Living History From Reconstruction to Today (2020);online book; also seeNew York Times book review
Weiss, Robert J. "Affirmative Action: A Brief History"Journal of intergroup relations (1987), 15#2 pp. 40–53;ISSN0047-2492
Wood, Peter W.Diversity: The Invention of a Concept (2003) an attack by a conservative anthropologist.online
Zamani-Gallaher, Eboni M.The case for affirmative action on campus: Concepts of equity, considerations for practice (Stylus Publishing, 2009), with timeline.online.
Media related toDiversity, equity, and inclusion at Wikimedia Commons