Website Cookies

We use cookies to make your experience better. Learn more on how here

Accept

How to remain committed to DEI in the current geopolitical landscape

The work of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is undoubtedly more challenging now than it was a few years ago.

By now, many organizational leaders which are based in the US or have US based operations, are aware of the need to conduct a legal review of their DEI programs. But having lawful policies in place is one part of the equation. The way you communicate about those policies matters just as much.

This Harvard Business Review article covers:

  • Two common DEI communications challenges
  • Best practices for communicating about DEI
  • Strategies for disseminating those best practices throughout an organization

Two common DEI communications challenges

The first challenge is talking too much. In the US, state attorneys rely on public-facing materials like websites and press releases to find evidence of illegal DEI programs. Any organization that wants to avoid being targeted needs to learn what language might inadvertently and falsely signal that it is engaged in illegal activity.

The second challenge is talking too little. Out of fear and confusion organizations are falling silent unnecessarily. Such silence risks damaging the trust that employees and consumers have in the organization’s values. It also creates a vacuum that opponents of DEI are all too eager to fill with misconceptions, such as the narrative that DEI has ended.

Best practices for communicating about DEI

DEI communications create legal risk when a statement suggests that the organization engages in the  “three Ps” by conferring a preference on a protected group with respect to a palpable benefit.

Here are some examples of how this shows up:

  • Justification for DEI –Statements which highlight “equal outcomes” such as “DEI uplifts historically disadvantaged groups to ensure equal outcomes” could suggest some protected groups get preferential treatment in areas like hiring or promotion which could be legally risky in the US. A less risky statement would focus on removing bias for example “DEI removes unfair barriers that prevent disadvantaged groups from competing on a level playing field.”
  • Hiring and promotion – Statements which suggest the organization considers race or ethnicity in employment decisions such as “We use diversity hiring to recruit people from underrepresented racial and ethnic backgrounds” could be legally risky in the US as it could be interpreted as some groups receiving preferential treatment. A less risky statement could be “We conduct outreach at diverse colleges to strive for a diverse applicant pool.”
  • Diversity targets – Statements which suggest that the organization considers a protected characteristic (such as sex) when making employment decisions to reach a desired outcome, such as “We will increase our percentage of women leaders by 30% over the next five years to ensure our leadership reflects the demographics of our society” could be legally risky in the US. A less risky statement could be “We aspire to increase our percentage of women leaders by 30% over the next five years.” Less risky  statements use aspirational language (such as “aim,” “aspire,” or “strive”) rather than rigid language (such as “will,” “ensure,” or “require”).
  • Diversity training – Most DEI training programs are low risk in the US. It is lawful to discuss racism, racial bias, and even concepts that some participants might find provocative, such as white supremacy, provided that no demographic group is singled out with broad negative claims that would create a “hostile work environment” for members of that group. Therefore, diversity training programs could include statements such as “Research suggests that implicit racial bias is widespread.”
  • Use of “DEI” terminology – Any other DEI statements that do not invoke the three Ps are legally low risk. Therefore leaders can still use each of the words in the DEI acronym, and advocate for: “Greater diversity of personnel in their organization”, “Fairness and equity in the organization’s policies and procedures” and “A culture of inclusion in which employees feel a sense of belonging.” They can also continue to highlight biases and barriers faced by members of different demographic groups and teach employees how to counteract those biases.

Disseminating Best Practices

The authors highlight three steps for organizations working in the US to encourage their people to sing from the same songbook:

  • Engage your public affairs or communications team. To ensure consistency in DEI communication both internally and externally
  • Document your organization’s approach to DEI in writing. An internal charter could set out why the organization supports DEI, how it defines the letters of that acronym, and how that commitment influences its practices relating to outreach, recruitment, onboarding, retention, and promotion.
  • Train managers on how to communicate around DEI. Many DEI communication errors are made not by DEI specialists but by managers who are involved peripherally in DEI activities. Organizations should train people who will be talking about the company’s DEI programs to do so consistently with its agreed approach.

You can read the full article here.

Blogs

Neuroinclusion and intersectionality in the workplace

Inclusion is rarely experienced through a single identity, yet much of how organisations approach it still assumes exactly that. A 2026 narrative review by Calvard and colleagues, brings this into sharp focus....
READ POST
Blogs

Rethinking meetings as spaces for inclusion

A 2026 review by Rogelberg and colleagues, synthesises thirty years of research on meeting science and offers a compelling insight. Meetings are not simply operational necessities, they are one of the most influential, and often overlooked, mechanisms through which inclusion is experienced at work....
READ POST
Blogs

Not all expertise is what it seems

A recent paper by Mergen and colleagues (2026), published in Organization, introduces a powerful and timely concept: toxic experts. These are individuals who, despite appearing credible, use their perceived expertise to promote misleading or harmful claims, often for personal or commercial gain....
READ POST

Copyright © 2024 Inclusive Leadership

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply

Web Design by Yellowball