THE DATA DRIVEN CASE TO SAVE DEI
The battle for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace is raging. Supporters claim DEI is vital to employee engagement, fair hiring and innovation. Detractors say DEI creates “radical” hiring practices and wasteful spending.
So why is DEI important? Why is it not only worth saving, but caring for deeply?
The subject of DEI generates high emotional responses, passion and hurt feelings. But what if we chose to look at these inclusion-based programs from a purely business perspective?
We personally and professionally embrace DEI initiatives on their definition, and back our support with statistical proof that DEI enhances profitability, performance and job security.
We also argue that DEI is the structural backbone of merit-based hiring — not the opposite.
This is our data-driven argument for the importance of DEI on a global scale.
Defining DEI: Stepping Past the Acronym
From gender to sexuality and gender expression to disability to religion, diversity is a statistical fact.
DEI stands for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. These 3 words are at the core of social interaction and how we communicate and function as a community.
Let’s depoliticize the term “DEI” and look at the pure definition of each of its components.
Diversity
Cambridge Dictionary defines diversity as “the fact of many different types of things or people being included in something; a range of different things or people”.
Diversity is not a concept or a hiring practice — it is a fact:
Gender: The UN predicts a 1:1 ratio of cisgender men to cisgender women by 2050. Men outnumber women by less than 1% worldwide.
Birthplace: Nearly 60% of all humans are born in Asia. 14.1% live in the Americas, and 13.5% in Europe.
Sexuality/Gender Expression: 9% of the world’s population openly self-identifies as LGBTQ+ (Ipsos).
Religion: 4 different world religions are followed by over 5% of the global population. Followers of folk religions, and unaffiliated persons also total over 5% each.
Disability: The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 1.3 billion people experience significant disability. That’s one in every 6 people.
Equity
There are multiple definitions of the word equity, ranging from justice to financial ownership. In the current case, equity is defined by Cambridge Dictionary as “the situation in which everyone is treated fairly according to their needs and no group of people is given special treatment”.
The concept of “special treatment” is a highly subjective one — it’s difficult to separate one’s current situation from their perception of fair treatment.
It’s important to distinguish equity from equality. Equality means treating everyone the same. Equity acknowledges people have unique qualities and differences in location, upbringing and personal experience.
Inclusion
From a social science perspective, Inclusion is defined by Cambridge Dictionary as “the idea that everyone should be able to use the same facilities, take part in the same activities, and enjoy the same experiences, including people who have a disability or other disadvantage”.
Inclusion is at the crux of most arguments for and against DEI. A study by McKinsey & Company finds that while 52% of respondents view diversity positively, a vast majority of the same people had a negative view of inclusion in the workplace.
Between 63% and 80% of survey respondents at 1,000 large global companies expressed “high levels of negative sentiment about equality and fairness of opportunity”. These sentiments reflected two very different ideas:
Some respondents felt not enough was being done to promote workplace inclusivity
Others felt that inclusion initiatives created unfair work opportunities.
Why The Word ‘Inclusion’ Creates So Much Fear
The North Carolina Senate voted to ban DEI programs in public schools in March 2025. The bill states that schools cannot teach “divisive concepts” to students or employees.
In her dissent against the DEI ban, State Senator Lisa Grafstein plainly stated: “Inclusion is not a divisive word, or it shouldn’t be.”
So when did the word inclusion become so scary?
For many people who oppose DEI, their concerns about inclusion come down to fear and misinterpretation:
A fear of displacement, or a loss of privilege
A fear of forced conformity to social views
An inherent distrust of corporations and institutions
Let’s be empathetic towards the people who fear these things. It doesn’t feel good to be afraid. The idea of being pushed into a belief structure is scary. And the concern that you’ll be replaced by force due to your gender or identity is terrifying.
The irony of this situation is simple: they’re afraid of the same things that DEI practices seek to shield minority groups from.
Global Workforce Data Says Inclusion Is Nothing to Fear
DEI isn’t a zero-sum game. There are enough jobs, salaries and secure positions to go around. Providing an equitable opportunity to one person doesn’t take a job away from someone else.
The World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2025 projects a net creation of 78 million new jobs by 2030. That figure includes jobs around the globe.
The same WEF report that 89% of the global workforce will be properly trained or upskilled to maintain their current roles — or be promoted.
As for job security and personal well-being? 64% of companies listed “supporting employee health and well-being” as a top priority — the #1 vote-getter of all responses.
The survey did not list race, gender, sex, disability, religion or ethnicity as a factor in any of these data points.
So if that’s the truth about inclusion, then where are all these misconceptions coming from?
Government Pushback Against DEI Is Rising With Trump
The pushback against DEI initiatives in the workforce is at an all-time high. This is driven by recent U.S. government policies banning DEI from Foreign Service and other government positions.
A White House release from March 2025 states that “hiring in all parts of government should be based solely on merit”.
In that release, President Donald Trump stated his opinion clearly: “We will terminate every diversity, equity, and inclusion program across the entire federal government.”
We Reject The Trump Administration’s Stance on DEI.
We clearly and comprehensively reject the Trump Administration’s stance on DEI initiatives. We do not simply do so based on emotions, personal agendas or what we do for work.
Our fundamental opposition to these anti-DEI policies is also based on 3 key principles that can be proven with objective data and professional analysis:
DEI does not cause job insecurity. Current government trade policies do.
DEI initiatives are statistically linked to financial outperformance.
DEI hiring practices do not replace merit-based hiring. They are merit-based.
DEI Isn’t Causing Job Insecurity. Government Policies Are.
DEI isn’t negatively impacting global job security. Current government policies are.
We reject the notion that DEI negatively impacts global job growth or job security, based on the data provided by the World Economic Forum.
Interestingly, the Future of Jobs Report 2025 does list other major causes for concern among corporations. Between ⅕ and ⅓ of all business leaders expect they’ll be negatively impacted by these 3 things:
Geopolitical tensions (34%)
Increased trade restrictions (23%)
Subsidies and industrial policies (21%)
In short: Corporations do not believe job security is threatened by DEI initiatives. They do believe their business models are threatened by current first-world government decisions.
Dollars Make Sense: DEI Creates Financial Outperformance
Not interested in book definitions or global workforce data? No problem — we’ll let money make the business case for DEI.
Here’s how diversity and inclusive business practices generate greater revenue for the international companies that employ DEI strategies.
Gender Diversity
McKinsey & Company reports that companies with greater gender diversity have a better chance of financially outperforming those that don’t.
In 2014, the top 1/4 of gender diverse companies were 15% more likely to beat industry averages for profitability. By 2019, they were 25% more likely to do so.
And yet, global female representation on executive teams sits at just 15%.
Companies with 30%+ women executives are 48% more likely to outperform competitors.
Ethnic Diversity
Companies with higher rates of ethnic diversity are even more likely to be profitable.
The same McKinsey & Company report shows that the most ethnically diverse companies are 36% more likely to turn above-average profits than competitors in the bottom quartile.
Despite this fact, global representation of ethnic minorities on executive teams is just 14%.
LGBTQ+ Diversity
The Harvard Business Review finds that companies with higher diversity levels (that include LGBTQ+ individuals) display 19% higher innovation-based revenues.
And a report from the Academy of Management states the presence of LGBTQ+ supportive policies is correlated with higher firm value and overall productivity.
As of 2025, roughly 9% of the global population openly self-identifies as LGBTQ+. And yet, there are currently only 4 openly queer Fortune 500 CEOs — just 0.8%.
Physical Disabilities and Diversity
16% of the global population lives with a significant physical impairment or disability. That’s 1.3 billion people — together, they’d comprise the 3rd most populous country on Earth.
And yet, professionals with physical disabilities and limitations are woefully under-represented in the global workforce.
In February 2025, the U.S. Department of Labor reported a 9.1% unemployment rate among persons with a disability — more than double the unemployment rate of people without a disability.
DEI Hiring IS Merit-Based Hiring
Merit-based hiring only exists if equitable opportunity exists. DEI provides that opportunity.
The final fallacy in the White House’s statement about DEI is about merit-based hiring. The Trump Administration claims that DEI initiatives have replaced truly merit-based employment and promotion standards.
Legal and human resources experts were quick to dispel this myth.
In a statement from law firm Parker Poe, attorney Jonathan M. Crotty states: “Companies can expand their recruiting efforts to include non-traditional sources of applicants. By expanding the pool of diverse applicants, the employer raises the odds that these candidates will be the best qualified persons when individual hiring decisions are made.”
Stephen Chu is the Chief Legal and Administrative Officer of InStride. He spoke about the inherent place that equal opportunity has in merit-based hiring.
“The goal of constructing a workforce based on merit, excellence, and intelligence requires a thoughtful approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion,” Chu said in a recent interview. “Merit without opportunity is an illusion.”
Statistically, We Will All Need DEI Protection
Maybe you’ll be relocated to a foreign office. Perhaps you’ll transfer onto a corporate team with vastly different demographics. Or sadly, you or someone you love may encounter a drastic change in physical abilities.
Maybe it won’t be you. Perhaps you will raise a gay child, or grow close with a physically limited neighbor.
At some point in our lives, we will all find ourselves in the minority. Whether it’s for a brief moment or a lifetime, the feeling of being “othered” is lonely, frustrating and terrifying.
In those inevitable moments where you find yourself outside the majority at work, you will want DEI programs there to protect you.
Saving DEI means protecting your neighbor, protecting your family member — and one day, even protecting yourself.
