“Inclusion is good for business.”
Yes—but it’s also not enough.
Many organisations rely heavily on the business case to justify equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) efforts. But new research shows this can actually backfire—especially for the people these initiatives aim to support.
In our forthcoming book Simplifying Inclusive Leadership (Autumn 2025), we highlight the growing evidence that while the business case might appeal to leadership, it can undermine belonging for marginalised groups.
The Evidence: What the Research Shows
Georgeac & Rattan (2023) tested how different diversity rationales—business case vs moral case—impact underrepresented professionals. The results were striking:
When LGBTQ+ professionals, women in STEM, and Black students were exposed to business-case language, they felt:
- Less sense of belonging
- Less interest in joining the organisation
The business case—despite good intentions—communicated that their value was conditional on their utility.
This wasn’t just theory. It directly impacted their willingness to work with those organisations.
A Cautionary Tale for Leaders
In higher education, similar patterns were found:
- Moral language (focused on fairness and justice) correlated with better outcomes for Black students
- Instrumental/business-case language correlated with worse graduation rates—especially when not paired with a moral message
The takeaway? Framing EDI solely in business terms may alienate the very people you’re trying to include.
Inclusion Isn’t Just Strategic—It’s Ethical
Inclusive leadership means holding both truths:
- That inclusion drives better outcomes
- And that inclusion is the right thing to do
These messages aren’t mutually exclusive. But one must lead with values—not just value creation.
