“Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.”
—James Baldwin
In an era when the battle for equity is as fierce as ever, the voices that advocate for the dismantling or dilution of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) work are growing louder. On August 30, 2024, The New York Times added to this chorus with an essay questioning the efficacy of DEI initiatives on college campuses, proposing instead a “new pluralism” that seeks to broaden the conversation while sidestepping the productive discomfort that often accompanies DEI work. Yet, this proposal, while seemingly progressive, is emblematic of a deeper resistance to the very confrontations necessary for actual progress.
As Ibram X. Kendi reminds us, “The only way to undo racism is to consistently identify and describe it—and then dismantle it” (Kendi, 2019). DEI work, thus, requires courageous confrontations—the bold and necessary engagements with uncomfortable truths and systemic injustices, undertaken to foster meaningful change and promote equity. This work is not just about diversity for diversity’s sake but about justice, accountability, and transformation. To retreat into a safe, sanitized version of inclusivity is to abandon the courage required to confront the entrenched systems of inequity that still define our institutions. We cannot afford to revert to a comfortable silence, for it is in silence that injustice festers and inequities are allowed to endure.
Under a Microscope
DEI initiatives are uniquely subjected to intense scrutiny, more so than many other fields. When DEI programs falter, the entire movement is often discredited. Unlike other industries, DEI practitioners are expected to achieve perfection, and failures are used as evidence to abandon the entire pursuit. This disproportionate scrutiny reflects a more profound resistance to the transformative work that DEI seeks to accomplish.
Further, the backlash against DEI is often unfairly weighted, with critics quick to highlight perceived shortcomings while neglecting the tangible progress these programs have achieved. This disproportionate critique reveals a bias that exaggerates what DEI gets wrong while ignoring what it gets right. For instance, substantial strides in gender equity have been made in education and the workplace, thanks in part to DEI initiatives. A 2019 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that policies aimed at increasing gender diversity in education and employment have contributed to narrowing the gender wage gap and increasing female representation in leadership roles (Blau & Kahn, 2017). These gains did not come from complacency but from confronting deep-seated inequities, fostering environments where women’s contributions are valued equally alongside their male counterparts.
The progress extends beyond gender equity and into broader cultural representation. Films like Marvel’s Black Panther and Disney’s Coco have reshaped the entertainment industry by centering Black and Latinx characters, cultures, and stories in ways previously unimaginable in mainstream media. These films are not just box-office successes; they reflect a growing cultural shift toward inclusion and representation that enriches our world. Black Panther grossed over $1.3 billion globally and became a cultural phenomenon, showing how the celebration of African heritage and narratives could resonate worldwide. Likewise, Coco, which beautifully showcases Mexican culture and traditions, grossed over $800 million and won numerous awards, proving that inclusion can be both financially and culturally beneficial (Box Office Mojo, 2018). These examples highlight how DEI efforts have helped create a new normal, where diversity, equity, and inclusion are not just accepted but celebrated and where we come to understand how they enrich society by offering and opening hearts and minds to diverse perspectives and stories. Despite critics' focus on missteps, the evidence suggests that courageous confrontations with inequity have strengthened rather than weakened our societal fabric.
The heightened scrutiny on DEI often stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the complex dynamics at play within DEI work, leading to oversimplifications that obscure the true nature of the challenges we face. It would be a mistake to dismiss how the critiques on DEI conflate categories such as race and class, oversimplifying the complex nature of social inequities, often missing how such categories as race and class intersect in ways that cannot be disentangled (Alexander, 2010). Addressing one without the other fails to dismantle the intricate web of barriers that sustain inequity. It also reveals how mainstream media often overlooks affirmative action programs benefiting white and wealthy individuals while disproportionately highlighting the advantages perceived to be granted through diversity initiatives. This selective coverage perpetuates the myth of DEI as a zero-sum game, where advancements for vulnerable people are seen as losses for others.
The pluralism highlighted in the New York Times article aims to include a broader range of perspectives, ostensibly fostering inclusivity without the divisiveness that DEI initiatives sometimes incite. However, as Ibram X. Kendi notes, true justice requires confronting uncomfortable truths about systemic inequity. By avoiding these conversations, the new pluralism risks maintaining the status quo, where silence and indifference allow inequities to persist and deepen.
Similarly, Robin DiAngelo has emphasized how privileged avoidance, what she terms “white fragility,” often hinders honest discussions about race and privilege (DiAngelo, 2018). The shift to pluralism may perpetuate this fragility by avoiding the challenging dialogues that DEI initiatives encourage. Equity is not about creating comfort but about challenging the status quo, confronting injustice, and pushing for the transformative change necessary to build a more just and inclusive world. As Bryan Stevenson so eloquently puts it, “We are all implicated when we allow other people to be mistreated” (Stevenson, 2014). If inequity is our running away from our collective responsibility to address systemic injustices, then equity is our collective courage to confront them.
The Impact of DEI
Despite criticisms, substantial evidence supports the positive impacts of DEI initiatives. Research indicates that effective DEI training fosters more inclusive environments, enhances team performance, and drives innovation (Dobbin & Kalev, 2016). A study by McKinsey and Company found that companies with diverse workforces are 35 percent more likely to achieve financial returns above their industry median (Hunt et al., 2015). These findings are not mere statistics; they reflect DEI’s potential to create environments where diverse talents can thrive.
In education, DEI initiatives improve academic outcomes and prepare students for a globalized workforce. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2018) found that students exposed to diverse perspectives are better equipped to succeed in diverse environments, enhancing their adaptability and problem-solving skills. Additionally, research by the American Educational Research Association (AERA, 2020) shows that inclusive curricula lead to higher student engagement and retention rates.
DEI is not an all-or-nothing endeavor. A nuanced approach recognizes the complexities of inequity and moves beyond simplistic binaries. Further, a more sophisticated understanding of DEI involves engaging with its complexities and continuously refining our strategies to deepen our human bonds. This involves learning from successful initiatives and adapting them to different contexts to maximize their impact.
DEI work is still in its relatively early stages, much like the first-generation iPhone was when it revolutionized the world of technology. Just as the proto-form of the iPhone could have been better, the nascent iterations of DEI initiatives are also bound to have flaws. However, progress has always been about something other than perfection but about growth and evolution. If we had abandoned the iPhone after its first generation because it wasn’t flawless, we would have never reached the advanced technological landscape we enjoy today, nor would we be poised for the even more significant innovations that lie ahead.
DEI work requires time, patience, and the willingness to iterate and improve. It’s not about having all the answers from the start but about the courage to make and learn from mistakes. Courageous confrontation in DEI isn’t about having all the answers at once but about having the courage to make mistakes on our route to answers, to raise essential questions in our quest to know how to live better lives together.
Our assessment of DEI should extend beyond individual actions to systemic change. How do we focus our intentions and attention more on policies and practices that address the root causes of inequity to foster environments of grace, patience, and tolerance? How do we argue for more DEI and not less, integrating it, for example, into early education—starting as early as pre-K—to instill values of compassion and tolerance from a young age, laying the foundation for a more equitable world? As Michelle Alexander states, “Education remains one of the most powerful weapons in the fight against systemic racism” (Alexander, 2010), and we know that “it is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.”
Preserving and evolving DEI work is not just an option; it is a moral imperative. Our challenges are complex, rooted in centuries of systemic inequity, and cannot be addressed with simplistic solutions or by retreating into a false sense of pluralism that avoids discomfort. The work of DEI demands that we confront the hard truths, engage in courageous conversations, and push forward with a commitment to justice that transcends individual comfort.
We must recognize that DEI is not a zero-sum game but one strategy among many for our collective uplift. By investing in DEI, we are not just addressing the symptoms of inequality but laying the groundwork for a society where everyone can thrive—regardless of race, class, gender, or background. This is not just about meeting diversity quotas or checking boxes; it’s about creating environments where diverse perspectives are valued, where equity is the standard, and where belonging is the norm.
Conclusion
The future of DEI must be one of continuous evolution, informed by the lessons of the past but unafraid to innovate for the future. It must start early, in our schools and communities, and extend into every sector of society. It must be as much about policies and practices as it is about mindsets and relationships. And it must be grounded in a deep, unwavering commitment to justice that refuses to settle for anything less than true equity.
I am proud to say that, at forwardED, we are dedicated to this vision. We believe in DEI's transformative power to reshape our institutions and our society. We believe in the necessity of this work—not because it is easy but because it is essential. And we believe that by pushing forward with grace, patience, and an unyielding commitment to equity, we can create a future that is not just more diverse but more just, inclusive, and human.
References
Alexander, M. (2010). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press.
American Educational Research Association (AERA). (2020). Inclusive Curricula and Student Success. AERA Publications.
Anderson, C. (2017). White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide. Bloomsbury Press.
Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2017). The gender wage gap: Extent, trends, and explanations. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(3), 789-865. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20160995
Box Office Mojo. (2018). Black Panther box office records. Retrieved from https://www.boxofficemojo.com
DiAngelo, R. (2018). White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism. Beacon Press.
Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2016). Why diversity programs fail. Harvard Business Review, 94(7/8), 52-60.
Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2015). Why diversity matters. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/why-diversity-matters
Kendi, I. X. (2019). How to Be an Antiracist. One World.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2018). The Condition of Education 2018. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2018144
Stevenson, B. (2014). Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. Spiegel & Grau.
_____________________________________
Suggested citation: Kirkland, D.E. (2024). Courageous Confrontations: Why We Must Preserve DEI Work. forwardED Perspectives, https://www.forward-ed.com/post/courageous-confrontations-why-we-must-preserve-dei-work.
David E. Kirkland, PhD, is the founder and CEO of forwardED. He is a nationally renowned scholar of education equity. He can be reached via email at: david@forward-ed.com.
Comments