Advertising Age published yet another perspective on
the imperative for redefining DEIBA+—this one presenting 5 directives for
success.
The problem
is all 5 suggestions are unoriginal—as well as proven failures. And each one is
being further countered by the political agenda of President Donald J. Trump.
To
underscore the contrived and clichéd characteristics, Ad Age illustrated the
opinion piece with a stereotypical stock image (depicted above).
Redefining
DEI—how to frame diversity as a business imperative
5 ways to align
diversity goals with bottom-line success
By Mike
Valdes-Fauli
One of the most
prevalent trends from 2024 has escalated in the new year. In the face of a
tidal wave of criticism of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, many
companies have reversed established policies to avoid public scrutiny.
As the proud
son of immigrant parents from Cuba and Mexico, I believe in championing
diversity in all facets of society, including the business landscape. However,
I also understand reasonable people can disagree on complex topics and that a
new approach is direly needed.
A few social
media activists are leading a pressure campaign against publicly traded
companies that champion diversity programs, causing shifts from companies
including Ford, Harley-Davidson, John Deere, Lowe’s, McDonald’s and Toyota.
Perhaps the most significant retreat came from Walmart, America’s largest
private employer, which recently announced a reversal of programs focused on
LGBTQ, climate change and other societal issues.
The tipping
point for this movement may have been Bud Light’s now infamous 2023 partnership
with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, which sparked a months-long
boycott, dethroned America’s best-selling beer and caused a $1.4 billion
drop in sales, according to the company.
These reversals
are actually cyclical. It was only four years ago during the pandemic when DEI
initiatives grew exponentially, ignited by racial justice protests and
COVID-caused inequities. According to McKinsey & Co., large enterprises
spent an estimated $7.5 billion on DEI-related efforts.
In this
unpredictable see-saw, it’s natural to wonder what the right balance is and
whether we’ll ever emerge from this quagmire. I’m reminded of the old joke
about a pessimist who laments; “Things really can’t get any worse.” To which
his optimist friend replies, “Oh, yes it can!”
Both sides of
the debate are fixated on terms that spark rancor. Rather than fall prey to
trigger words and acronyms, perhaps there’s a better way forward. Our path to
collective success should be rooted in narrowing the discussion to areas of
common ground.
Take “global
warming,” another polarizing term that elicits venom from entrenched groups. In
my hometown of Miami, there is disagreement about the cause of climate change
(and whether it even exists), but our community found common ground by
reframing the issue around undeniable facts.
Regardless of
whether you believe in global warming, there is no question that we are
enduring “sea level rise.” This newer term has brought together liberals,
conservatives, scientists, business leaders and politicians whose common
pursuit is reinforcing our diminished sea wall to prevent coastal flooding and
ensure the future of waterfront real estate. The key component was narrowing
this issue to a smaller, shared goal while focusing less on blame for how we
got here in the first place.
Two decades
ago, celebrated Harvard Business School Professors Michael E. Porter and Mark
Kramer coined the term “creating shared value.” The premise was that corporate
social responsibility should deliver mutual benefit for a company as well as
society. The more a business combines altruism with profitable strategies, the
less criticism it might receive.
As it pertains
to diversity, such mutual interests could include unlocking greater economic
value for companies, employees and shareholders. Like it or not, DEI
initiatives have statistically proven to reduce employee attrition and increase
employee motivation and innovation, according to Boston Consulting
Group, which surveyed more than 27,000 employees in 16 countries.
To strike the
right balance, brands and their consultants would be wise to heed five guiding
principles:
Reframe as a
business imperative
Rather than a
charitable box to check, companies should frame the issue as a competitive
advantage and a critical piece of a winning strategy.
Embrace
demographic change
Capitulating to
external threats is tempting but will ultimately prove shortsighted. There is
no question the future demographics of America are changing and growing more
diverse. Gen Z is 51% non-white and 25% Hispanic. Shareholders ignore
these trends at their peril.
Focus on
results
Rather than
extolling a company’s virtue with sweeping public announcements, organizations
should operate in stealth mode and do the work of diversifying their customer
base, employee makeup and future-proofing their brand.
Be authentic
Not all
diversity initiatives are created equal. Although the fundamental goals are
similar, every company should adhere to its values, unique selling proposition
and brand identity. Irrespective of where you sit on LGBTQ issues, does anyone
think the Bud Light campaign was consistent with four decades of its marketing?
Which one of these things doesn’t belong: Clydesdales, talking frogs, the
Super Bowl and … transgender influencers?
My point is
that companies can and should lean into societal issues, but not by pivoting
quickly toward inauthentic directions and forgetting what they worked hard to
represent for millions of customers.
Nuanced
delivery
Having to
choose between a consistent brand and a diverse organization is a false choice.
Companies
should preserve one cohesive set of values but amplify them with nuanced
internal and external campaigns that resonate culturally for distinct target
audiences.
In the words of the iconic “Mad Men” character
Don Draper, “If you don’t like what’s being said, change the conversation.”
It’s time we realize that words matter and begin reframing DEI around common
goals that benefit society as well as the bottom line.
