DEI backlash—A brand playbook for Pride Month, Juneteenth and beyond

In recent years, June has been awash with organizations supporting the LGBTQ+ community for Pride Month and the Black community for Juneteenth, Black Music Month, and even Caribbean Heritage Month. This June, fear of a DEI backlash tempered some celebrations and made them feel superficial.

Central to the fluctuating support for these recognitions is how the social economic, or political context constantly changes. This raises the question: How can brands be authentic and steadfast in their commitment to advancing marginalized communities while observing holidays and heritage months? Here are 4 questions every organization should ask to ensure its commitments to inclusivity and social justice are authentic and incorporated into operations.

Are we leading with our values?

Innovation, continuous improvement, collaboration, integrity, curiosity—many organizations see at least one of these values as mission-critical, yet often do not actively connect them to DEI efforts. Diversity, equity, inclusion, empathy and sustainability are purposely excluded from this short list because they are implicit in each of these values.

True innovation, for example, demands diverse experiences and perspectives. Empathy lives in curiosity and is a prerequisite for collaboration and customer innovation. Those who are truly committed to integrity will foster a culture of equity and transparency. When people are curious, they are more likely to seek and embrace diversity. The benefits to leading with values include strategically sound DEI initiatives but also greater consumer trust and brand differentiation.

How do we ensure our teams and data are cross-cultural?

Affinity bias—the inclination to favor those with similar backgrounds and interests—is a natural human tendency. So, to interrupt it we must consciously integrate different perspectives into our teams and use diverse data in our decisions.

Do we tend to hire employees from the same schools, companies or networks? Is our market research reliant on averages or monolithic views of customers? Do we leverage cross-functional teams in our decision-making? Being cross-cultural means ensuring that we are not only avoiding singular views on race, ethnicity, gender and sexuality, but also avoiding singular views on generation, class, ability and even expertise.

Are we focused on changing processes, not people, to achieve DEI success?

In 2021, I addressed a group of Lean Six Sigma professionals—individuals skilled in removing risks, errors and defects from business processes—about DEI. Prior to the conference, a fifth of the attendees completed a survey on their organizations’ DEI efforts. This research revealed their DEI efforts overwhelmingly prioritized auditing and changing employees, not the enterprise.

Anti-bias training and diversifying the workforce, as examples, often fail to address systemic issues causing continued underrepresentation and marginalization. Have we examined HR policies and benefits for gender bias? Do our market research recruiting specifications reflect category behavior and societal dynamics? Are our financial models only based on traditional assumptions and historical best practices? Are the roles responsible for DEI at the firm integrated into operations? If DEI initiatives are tied to people (and not processes, systems or policies), DEI progress and commitment will exit when people do.

What can intersectional experiences teach us about employees and customers?

Are people in your organization still referring to the “general market” or “gen pop”? Today, the general market is incredibly diverse, and it’s critical to note its changing dynamics and not overrepresent the majority. Multiracial Americans are the fastest-growing racial group. Twenty-five percent of people in the U.S. have disabilities. Almost 20% are Hispanic. And roughly 30% are low-income, with incomes less than twice the poverty threshold. There is no average consumer, and if we focus only on more privileged identities in society, we miss innovation that exists in the margins.

A recent study on women in the workplace, showing findings by gender, race/ethnicity, LGBTQ+ or disability status, didn’t tell a full story, since people frequently belong to more than one of these demographic groups. How would the insights shift if race and gender or ethnicity and disability were combined? Examining key identity intersections does not produce statistically insignificant microsegments; such intersections provide an opportunity to incorporate valuable context and pressure test ideas with real people that reflect society today.