If you\u2019ve ever read or seen Romeo & Juliet, you\u2019re familiar with the line \u201cWhat\u2019s in a name? That which we call a rose\/ By any other name would smell as sweet…\u201d Yet when it comes to discussions of diversity, inclusion, and equity, there\u2019s been a lot of movement around the terminology. Most recently SHRM made waves by dropping the E and going to I&D. This examination of the evolution of the names used also addresses what it all means for the work to create genuinely inclusive environments.<\/p>\n
The civil rights movement of the 1960s is largely viewed as the starting point of today\u2019s focus on workplace diversity<\/a>. This included:<\/p>\n As a result of these laws focused on diversity, equity, inclusion<\/a> and accessibility, companies began incorporating more diversity training and working to integrate their office environments without discrimination based on race<\/a>, gender, national origin, religion, age, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status or other distinctions.<\/p>\n Research is plentiful today supporting the value of diversity<\/a> and how it affects how well people do their jobs. In its late 2023 report, Diversity Matters Even More<\/a>, McKinsey & Company found the business case for these efforts is increasing. For example:<\/p>\n So, what\u2019s with all the changing ways of labeling these initiatives? That\u2019s what we discuss next.<\/p>\n As organizations and communities have broadened their understanding of what it takes to achieve diverse representation and take a purpose-driven approach to equity and inclusion, the way we talk about it has changed. This section provides a succinct summary of each stage of this progression.<\/p>\n The initial focus, roughly starting in the late 1980s, was often on Diversity and Inclusion. \u201cDiversity\u201d focused on representation across different demographics, especially race and gender. “Inclusion” aimed to ensure these diverse groups were welcomed and respected.<\/p>\n In many cases, these initiatives in the workplace leaned heavily on hiring practices and ensuring underrepresented groups were included.<\/p>\n In the 1990s, the importance of addressing systemic barriers that prevent equal access and opportunity was better understood. This led to an added emphasis on Equity to highlight the need for fair access to resources and opportunities for all employees.<\/p>\n The attention to fair treatment and leveling the playing field embraced a broader spectrum of diversity recognizing various identity groups, including ethnic, religious, and LGBTQ+ communities.<\/p>\n Some feared expanding the scope would dilute efforts. Yet at the same time an emergence of diversity professionals<\/a> in organizations helped the shift to more awareness raising and educational trainings.<\/p>\n In recent years, some organizations added \u201dBelonging,\u201d which is defined by the Achievers Workforce Institute \u201cas an experience of connection, security and community \u2013 feeling at home in one\u2019s place without reservation.\u201d<\/p>\n This shift reflected the increased emphasis on employee experience and acknowledged that true inclusion involves creating spaces where people feel they can be their authentic selves.<\/p>\n The Achievers Workforce Institute reports employees with a high sense of belonging compared to a low sense of belonging are:<\/p>\n Yet, some worry the subjectivity of Belonging \u2014 as it taps into emotional and psychological aspects of workplace culture \u2014 makes it more difficult to influence and measure.<\/p>\n All of which brings us to the more recent, I&D. Some organizations have reordered the terms to I&D to stress that creating an inclusive culture is the foundation upon which all else rests.<\/p>\n Announcing the change at SHRM in July, president Johnny C. Taylor, Jr. wrote on Linkedin<\/a>, \u201cWe’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.\u201d<\/p>\n This reframing is meant to encourage organizations to first build inclusive policies, practices, and mindsets so that when diversity increases those individuals are genuinely included from day one.<\/p>\n Dropping equity from the discussion was met with widespread criticism<\/a>. Opponents questioned the absorption of \u201cfairness, justice and access to advancement for all people\u201d into the broader term when structural inequality and systemic barriers remain. For example, take wage disparity<\/a>:<\/p>\n Still others defended the move stating that the equity component has seen serious backlash. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling against affirmative action in higher education, major companies have seen a jump in complaints, threatening letters, and litigations regarding long-standing DEI policies and procedures.<\/p>\n Authors of a Harvard Business Review<\/a> article wrote that diversity programs may be at risk if they meet the following three criteria:<\/p>\n Ultimately, every change in the way we view diversity, equity, inclusion, and even belonging, reflects shifting societal understanding of the importance of balance representation, fairness, culture, and emotional safety in the workplace. Again, drawing on Shakespeare, the rose can smell just as sweet regardless of its acronym so long as efforts continue to be not just about numbers but about creating holistic, supportive, and fair environments where everyone can thrive.<\/p>\n Find out how your employees feel about your current diversity and inclusiveness efforts with\u202fsurveys that reveal their sentiments<\/a>.\n
The business impact of diversity, equity, and inclusion<\/h2>\n
\n
Evolution of the concept<\/h2>\n
Diversity & Inclusion (D&I)<\/h3>\n
Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DEI)<\/h3>\n
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion & Belonging (DEIB)<\/h3>\n
\n
Inclusion & Diversity (I&D)<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
The practice remains relevant<\/h2>\n
\n