SHRM recently put out a statement that they will be removing the “E” in DEI. Saying they are moving to just I&D, focusing on the importance of inclusion and then diversity more than equity. They are removing equity to focus on inclusion and diversity as a way to address the current shortcomings of DEI programs that they believe have received societal backlash and have caused increasing polarization.

CEO Johnny Taylor writes, “We're going to lead with inclusion, because we need a world where inclusion is front and center. And that means inclusion for all, not some people. Everyone has a right to feel that they belong in the workplace and that they are included.”

When asked if SHRM was abandoning equity altogether, his response was that SHRM’s “commitment to advancing equity remains steadfast,” and that leading with inclusion would catalyze “holistic change” in the workplace and beyond. Since SHRM and Taylor’s statement on this, there has been a flood of opinions. Some feel relief and aim to offer support, others feel confusion and fear for the future of HR.

Protesting HR professionals think this is a political stance and that SHRM has been notoriously known as a conservative organization looking to push anti-DEI agendas for 2025. They believe SHRM has never been that progressive with their efforts and this is somewhat in line for them, and many are very upset that this was announced on Black Women Equal Pay Day and felt that was a deliberate move and telling of SHRM’s underlying message.

Others in the field are upset that this organization who is supposed to be a resource for HR Practitioners and a go-to as a benchmark for the industry, is moving backwards. Many of its members are questioning if the organization truly represents their views and values and if this shift will change their decision to maintain membership.

Several leaders in the industry have made statements that it may be time to look at other professional organizations and begin to have a variety with diverse approaches that support the HR field. Some of the concerns with SHRM’s framework behind the removal of equity is that you cannot have inclusion without equity and that diversity still needs to come before anything else. “You can’t just get rid of equity and focus on inclusion and diversity. Inclusion without equity creates increased power differentials and exploitation. Diversity without equity is tokenism. Disapprovers view this change as distracting from the bigger, real, tough, issues involved with equity that they don’t want to address.  Some state this is their way of saying they don’t care to help the HR community work for systemic change in the workplace. Unpopular to CEO, Taylor’s remarks, many people believe that DEI is not causing the polarization but instead the real inequities within organizations.

On the other hand, there are still many HR professionals in support of SHRM’s change. Supporters say it’s not about abandoning DEI, it’s about making it work and making it more strategic because right now it is a mess. Some say SHRM is too pro-employer; however, supporters make the point that for HR folk to have a seat at the table, they cannot be pro-employee and anti-business. Saying this shows how opposing professionals don’t understand what it means to have a strategic seat at the table from a bottom-line perspective. Supporters claim the naysayers are seeing DEI as affirmative action which are two different things. Since legal changes to affirmative action in 2023, companies are disinvesting in DEI and even removing DEI focused language. That is not the trajectory we want, and it isn’t helping the initial goal of DEI programming. These HR professionals say that “DEI has become a distraction from results”- even though studies have shown that diversity drives results.

So clearly, we are not hitting the mark on what DEI was supposed to achieve. Some say it’s because we refuse to really work on the equity portion and others say it’s because we are trying too hard to focus on equity. Saying that removing equity from the forefront has removed the risk involved in DEI initiatives. Equity is subjective, complicated, and difficult to measure and achieve. Diversity and inclusion receive less controversy and are less political. Taylor claims he interviewed HR professionals and even DEI practitioners and no one could commonly agree on what equity meant. Was it equal opportunity? Was it equal outcome? Or something else? He felt like with diversity and inclusion, there was no confusion on the definition and thus is more attainable to achieve. SHRM’s DEI efforts were meant to unify people, not divide them.

As you can see, there are many different opinions on what SHRM’s decision to remove equity from the equation means and how it affects the HR field. Regardless of your stance on SHRM’s actions, most HR professionals can likely agree that the area of DEI needs some improvement and HR as well as the organizations we support could definitely look at the current state of DEI, what’s working and what’s not, and make some changes.

Whether Taylor’s approach will prove effective can only be seen overtime. It will be interesting to watch what SHRM does next and the programming that follows. It will also be interesting to see if any other professional HR organizations begin to take this approach, remain with their current DEI approach, or possibly even present other approaches. ASE will continue to monitor the DEI space and aim to stay up to date and well-informed on changes in this framework.

Sources:

Kriegel, J. (2024, July 12). SHRM got rid of the E in Dei and HR is losing their minds. Culture Partners. https://culturepartners.com/insights/shrm-got-rid-of-the-e-in-dei-and-hr-is-losing-their-minds/

Mohan, P. (2024, July 12). HR organization SHRM Drops “equity” from DEI approach. Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/91154675/shrm-hr-organization-dropped-equity-from-dei

Rae, A. (2024, July 11). SHRM’s problematic dei pivot: A step backwards for workers’ rights. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/aparnarae/2024/07/11/shrms-problematic-dei-pivot-a-step-backwards-for-workers-rights/

Stewart, A. (2024, July 12). SHRM’s removal of equity from Dei is political. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/shrms-removal-equity-from-dei-political-amy-stewart-zoljf/