Viewing the “Anti-DEI Movement” as an opportunity, rather than a threat

In 2024, several prominent large corporations began – very publicly – to move away from their  Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. As we moved into 2025, the so-called ‘Anti-DEI Movement’ continued to gain traction – and much attention in the media.

US politics and executive orders aside, some corporations have chosen to scrap DEI altogether. Others, like Costco, are standing strong and committed to their initiatives. Here in Canada, some organizations are opting to rebrand DEI. For instance, the University of Alberta is now referring to DEI as ACB – Access, Community, and Belonging.

Still others are troubled by the use of the acronym which, they feel depersonalizes and dilutes the intent and purpose. The Tyee, an independent news magazine in BC, pointed out that politicians and leaders have only been referring to ‘DEI’ as opposed to diversity, equity, and inclusion. In a recent article, they write: “Cowardly, but understandable. After all, who opposes diversity? Who is against equity? Who wants to fight inclusion?”

So, what’s behind all this attention?   

The cost of having (and not having) DEI initiatives

Its potential value notwithstanding, DEI has become big business and, for many organizations, has become corporate and costly. It’s difficult to quantify exactly how much DEI initiatives cost an organization. Such factors as how large the organizations are, how they’re legislated, and whether they’re public or private need to be considered. Cost also depends on how diverse (or not) they were to begin with, how much education, training, and learning is/was necessary, and the amount of past harm that needed to be addressed and undone. Costs could range from a few thousand to several million (and beyond).

It’s equally – if not more so – important to look at the cost of not having DEI or doing away with it. While many organizations embrace DEI because they genuinely want to be good and ethical employers, it’s also good for business and has demonstrated the potential to significantly impact their bottom line. As outlined in this Time article, the US Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s 2024 Annual LBGTQ+ Climate Survey found that “80% of LGBTQ+ adults are willing to boycott a company” that doesn’t support DEI initiatives. Other studies show that this community is “fiercely loyal to brands that support them.” In 2024, Ford Motor Company announced they were moving away from DEI programs. As individuals within the 2SLGBTQIA+ community bought 5.6% of all Ford vehicles in the last five years, Ford could lose nearly $2.4 billion in sales this year alone. And this is only one diverse group within the broader population.

Of course, the bottom line isn’t the only cost to consider. Other factors are reputation, availability of talent, the amount of innovation and creativity that diverse groups bring to the table, and mitigation of discrimination to name a few.

Getting back to the ‘why’

DEI nay-sayers (political or otherwise) claim that DEI is discriminatory and has led to folks being hired/retained without merit. The fact of the matter is that our population is immensely diverse with many interconnecting social categorizations. This means the talented workforce is equally diverse. If employers don’t embrace that reality, simply put, they’ll go without talented staff. And embracing that reality needs to go well beyond publishing a statement or having a policy.

We have long held that simply having a DEI statement on a company website or having a DEI policy doesn’t in and of itself change behaviour. In fact, it can be harmful for equity-deserving populations to be attracted (even lured) to organizations that aren’t ready or safe for them. For instance, if an employer wishes to ‘tap into’ the 2SLGBTQIA+ community (something we’ve heard more than once) but hasn’t considered the potential for bias in the workplace, they are setting those employees up for harm. This is where the importance of DEI initiatives (by any other name) come into play.

Additionally, attracting isn’t the same as retaining, and hiring doesn’t mean treating employees equitably. Those who are simply meeting their quota because they ‘have to’ aren’t necessarily focusing on systemic change (including ensuring equitable pay, benefits, and opportunities).

Perhaps it’s idealistic, but we’d like to believe that workplaces can be diverse, inclusive, and equitable without focusing specifically on ‘DEI,’ or having a DEI ‘program.’ This is about decent, ethical, respectful employers treating humans equitably. That’s not to say that DEI initiatives should be scrapped. Rather – and as we’ve always felt – employers need to take a step back and look at their ‘why’, their values, and the foundation they’re built upon:

  • Who do they want to be, what do they want to be known for, and why?
  • Why do they exist, and what impact do they have/want to have?
  • Can they have that impact without a diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace?
  • If they’re able to do so now without diversity, will they continue to be able to later as the talent pool becomes increasingly diverse?
  • What internal barriers are getting in the way of building that kind of workplace?

We feel this ‘movement’ is an opportunity for employers to reflect on the above and get back to their ‘why.’ It’s not necessary to be on the far left, ‘woke’, or a social justice warrior to have heart as an organization. As Costco, who have made the decision to stand behind their DEI initiatives, stated “Diversity is not just a policy for us. It’s integral to how we connect with and serve our members every day.”

Whether you call it DEI or not, our HR Consultants can support you in aligning your practices with the impact you wish to make.