"The Devil once lived in Heaven, and those who have not met him are unlikely to recognize an angel when they see one." (Richard Crossman in 'The God That Failed') ¹

" 'At Deloitte, diversity, equity and inclusion are core to our values.' Well, . . . they were. That language was at the top of a page that has been deleted from the professional services firm’s website in a purge of DEI-related content. Recently, management told staff it was 'sunsetting' its diversity goals in the US, as well as its annual DEI report. Deloitte staff may be wondering what exactly their firm’s values are, if a supposedly core element of them can be abruptly disappeared like an out-of-favour Soviet official cropped from a photograph. They’re not the only ones with cause to wonder. A host of other major companies, from McDonald’s to Target to Walmart, have made similar retreats over the past couple of months (albeit mostly without trying to destroy the digital evidence)." ²

Corporate names that can be added to the ones mentioned in the FT quote above include (among many others) Google, Meta, Goldman Sachs, Disney, Boeing and Ford. Many of these enterprises, that have become bywords for the latest and best people practices, withdrew meekly (and sometimes with great enthusiasm) from the lists of DEI champions where they were proud to be enumerated a few short months ago.

This has evoked incredulity, outrage and even withdrawal in those who, till recently, were celebrating what they thought was unlosable terrain in the DEI wars. This column argues against the natural impulse to vilify the course-changing captains by explaining why such responses were to be expected, given the profiles chosen for CEO roles. A geographically distant example from history is dissected to demonstrate such pivots are to be expected even from the most towering personages but that all progress is not necessarily lost along the way. A less happy parallel is the 1949 book (from which the title of this column is twisted) in which several intellectuals questioned their blind belief in communism. With the benefit of hindsight we now know that the revulsion also went much too far in the other direction.  ³ For a couple of decades after it was written, the relative lot of the common citizen in the West kept improving, partly as a result of the need to insulate them from the same lure to which these great minds had fallen prey in their youth. Perhaps DEI can also gain from this check and return more resilient, rooted and relevant. That will not happen automatically and we shall review some ways in which the valuable core, shorn of excess, can be carried forward. 

This column has a limited scope. By no means is it a comprehensive analysis or history of the DEI movement and the masterful (or mis) steps it has taken. Still less is it a defence of the reactionary tsunami that has overtaken it. It is just a small window that tries peeping into the minds of corporate CEOs who have fallen like ninepins before the anti-DEI bowling ball. At the time of writing most DEI pins are proudly standing in Indian bowling alleys. ⁴  Some of the suggestions in the column are intended to prevent a 'strike' here.

More Tartuffe – Less More

Progressives have been less than pleased by the velocity of the volte-faces in the US and have made no secret of their disgust. ⁵ The CEOs in question have generally chosen not to respond, though, if they did, they might not sound too different from Tartuffe in the penultimate scene of Molière’s (eponymous) masterpiece: 

"I shall not be embittered by your insults,
For Heaven has taught me to endure all things….
Your ravings cannot move me; all my thought
Is but to do my duty….
The act cannot be aught but honourable,
Coming from that high power which sends me here." ⁶

Disappointing it may be but should we really be surprised? If nine out of ten CEO job specifications describe Tartuffes, do we have any right to expect them to display the unflinching resolve of Sir Thomas More and die for their principles? ⁷ Please go through as many CEO job specification as you can access and, if you can’t, imagine them based on all the many books on corporate leadership that flood the market in an endless stream. Chances are you will see these repeatedly:

• Vision ⁸
• Stakeholder management (read Shareholder satisfaction) ⁹
• Agility and change management ¹⁰
• Ruthless execution ¹¹
• Building and energizing talent ¹²
  

You will need to search a lot and probably still not find too many jobs specs demanding:

• Sticking up for principles of fairness and inclusiveness ¹³
• Adding substantially to the aggregate happiness of the people in the organization ¹⁴
• Treating people as ends rather than mere means ¹⁵

If CEO’s are chosen based on the first set of criteria, is it any wonder that they demonstrate agility in tacking to the wind rather than holding on to the second set of principles with grim determination? One need not admire chameleons but that’s no reason to deny their place in the natural order. 

It’s Happened Before

Perhaps a historical perspective might help understand (though not condone) what’s happening around us. To prevent it from riling present sensibilities here, we’ll pick a distant geography: 17th century Britain. Through the period of the Civil War, the Protectorate, the Restoration and the Glorious Revolution, an entire generation’s elites had to change their publicly stated beliefs at least two or three times in their own lifetimes. There were, of course, principled individuals like "Sir John Eliot. After the dissolution of 1629 Eliot was imprisoned by the King, and deliberately allowed to die in the Tower of London. He could have obtained his release by grovelling. He did not do so."¹⁶  These were exceptions. Most others, on either side of Eliot in political stature and wealth, felt it prudent to change their tunes with the times. This was not simply out of personal interest but their concern for the well-being of the groups they led. Not all of them are reviled today. We think none the worse of someone like General George Monck, who fought for the parliament and was then instrumental in bringing about the Restoration. Nor is the reputation of Samuel Pepys tarnished, though "[t]here is nothing in Pepys’s life or writing to suggest that he that he would not have served the dynasty of Oliver Cromwell, once effectively established, with the same loyalty that he gave to the Stuarts… Pepys for all his long service to the House of Stuart was a born cross-bencher. The battle between Whigs and Tories had cost him severe wounds, but to a mind of his type the whole thing was laughable." ¹⁷  To get back to our point, moral outrage at changing views in changed situations avails little. 

We can also draw solace from the fact that even major reversals do not usually change the course of progress whose time has come. To pursue our chosen example and track the struggle between the absolute power of the monarch in Britain and the checks parliament wished to impose on it, despite the seeming setback of the Restoration, the trend was clear. "[In 1603] James succeeded by hereditary right, confirmed by Elizabeth’s nomination; in 1714 George I owed his throne to an Act of Parliament which passed over many persons with a better hereditary claim. James, like the Tudors before him, chose ministers and favourites as seemed best to him; by the early eighteenth century ministers could not govern without a Parliamentary majority. James was still expected to 'live of his own', to finance government from crown lands, feudal dues, and the customs… By 1714 Parliament, in almost permanent session, had complete control of finance…. By then Parliament had established a degree of control over the executive and over all its actions – including foreign policy, which early Stuart kings had regarded as their private preserve. James and Charles acted arbitrarily in matters affecting the stability of the country’s economic life... The economy was highly regulated. At the end of the period economic policy was formulated by Parliament, and laissez-faire had succeeded regulation in most spheres." ¹⁸

Rebuilding Inclusiveness on Firmer Foundations

While Indian organizations have been relatively immune to the DEI-fenestration wave sweeping the US, since gender-related affirmative action gained momentum here in the wake of initiatives spear-headed by the local subsidiaries of US firms, the chilling effect may cool indigenous enthusiasm for such programmes too. What can DEIsts do before reactionary waves reach our shores?

The first thing CEOs and their management teams need to do is to think long, hard and honestly about the real reasons behind their DEI commitment and agenda. At the end of this introspection, they will find their motivation comes primarily (though not necessarily exclusively) from wanting to be:

• Fashionable (use 'best practice' if that makes you feel better)
• Financially (or 'competitively') advantaged 
• Fair (even if that comes at a Fashion or Financial cost)

If DEI was adopted for Fashion, both vogue and agility now dictate a clear change of direction. Move to 'masculine energy' or whatever mantra is à la mode at the moment. You will probably make significant savings and should have no problem sharing 15% with me for reducing your guilt when you take this escape route.

Your task becomes a bit harder if you decide you have business reasons for DEI. The same HQ that earlier issued fiats triggering local mirrorings of corporate inclusivity programmes, are now likely to go through your ROI explanations with a micron-toothed comb. Jokes apart, this is a genuine opportunity to review possibly bloated budgets and peripheral programmes so as to devote more attention and resources on the ones that have demonstrable business benefits. It’s worth remembering too that every benefit cannot be translated into Rupees (at least not believably). Here are some examples of such DEI gains:

• Preempting legislative action on quotas being imposed in the private sector. 
• Gaining competitive advantage through varied skill sets, such as those provided by Neurodiverse and Edudiverse talent. ²⁰
• Understand mindsets of customers and deal with officials in regions or countries where those communities are in a majority or exercise significant political and economic power.

Justification becomes much easier again if you conclude that DEI is a fundamental pillar of the fairness to which your organization is committed. "Diversity determines how much of the totality of the talent, seemingly abundant in our country, we permit ourselves to tap." ²¹  Arguments such as this verge on the previous 'competitive advantage argument' the key distinction being that our third justification demands we take remedial steps whether there is a business gain or not. In any case, we need not parse the difference too carefully since both of these demand similar plans of action going forward. We now turn to these.

The least demanding option is to follow the trajectory typified in the last paragraph of the previous section. The absolute authority of kings was bound to crumble before the increasing power of parliament and the temporary ups and downs were only preludes to this ultimate conclusion. An indelibly forceful phrasing of this attitude was conveyed by Theodore Parker: "I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one, my eye reaches but little ways; I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by the experience of sight; I can divine it by conscience. And from what I see I am sure it bends towards justice."²²  In our context, this might require too a long wait. Both HR and CEOs-Promoters-Philanthropists committed to DEI need to pull the arc smartly and strongly.

HR must 'blind' as many internal and external selection / evaluation processes as possible. This was elaborated in an earlier column on affirmative action. "After opening our eyes, paradoxically, the second set of measures we need to take, in order to minimize discrimination, is to close them again. The paradox begins to get resolved when we recall that Lady Justice is shown blindfolded for exactly the same reason: to guard against irrelevant influences and to eliminate even the possibility of bias. Tremendous success has been obtained in debiasing hiring decisions through the adoption of 'Blind Recruitment'. ²³ This also has the potential to rid us of other costly mistakes in selection, such as those biases hard-wired into us as a result of our evolutionary history (for more examples of these errors see the section on 'Longing for Long Leaders' in a previous column).²⁴  But this is only the first step. Much Affirmative Action remains to be taken (and awards to be won) in other domains of talent management and career progression." ²⁵ A subsequent column has explained how sortition (after minimal qualifying criteria are met) can improve all-round efficiency as well as equity. ²⁶  This can be particularly useful for debiasing large-scale recruitment. The main point of these (overdue) process improvements is that they clearly aid the most meritorious in being selected without discrimination of any kind. They should, therefore, be perfectly acceptable to the anti-DEIsts. HR also has a role in changing mindsets. Say good-bye to those AA-type 'mea culpa' confessional workshops. A total cognitive transformation is needed. This will require us to unravel the mental pitfalls, false causal connects and unjustified agency attributions that are the true roots of discrimination. The topic is vast and demands conceptual breakthroughs and new methodologies (as well as a separate column) but it will be the only way to prevent future regressions by malleable CEOs.

Another way to ensure there is no 'merit adjustment' needed by the time people appear before and enter organizations is in the hands of CEOs-Promoters-Philanthropists. These initiatives need to fund upstream improvement programmes for the disadvantaged, going back to college, college-entrance, school and even pre-school. Being independently funded through dedicated grants and trusts, their goals cannot be deflected by storms ravaging the value-statements of corporates. Admittedly, this is a far longer-term solution and can, therefore, not substitute what HR has to do now. However, it will have the most lasting benefits. 

As so often, Abraham Lincoln put it best. "It is said an Eastern monarch once charged his wise men to invent him a sentence, to be ever in view, and which should be true and appropriate in all times and situations. They presented him the words: 'And this, too, shall pass away.' How much it expresses! How chastening in the hour of pride! – how consoling in the depths of affliction! 'And this, too, shall pass away.' And yet let us hope it is not quite true. Let us hope, rather, that by the best cultivation of the physical world, beneath and around us; and the intellectual and moral world within us, we shall secure an individual, social, and political prosperity and happiness, whose course shall be onward and upward, and which, while the earth endures, shall not pass away." ²⁷ 

References:
--------------------

1. Richard Crossman, The God That Failed, Harper and Bothers, 1949.

2. Simon Mundy, How Trump’s war on DEI is changing corporate culture, Financial Times, 17 February 2025.

3. Ted Morgan, Reds: McCarthyism in Twentieth-Century America, Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2004.

4. Sreeradha Basu, Some US MNCs may slow DEI efforts, but Indian companies not to let up momentum, The Economic Times, 10 February 2025.

5. Joan Westenberg, This Is the Age of the Coward, The Index, 14 February 2025.

6. Molière, Tartuffe, Delphi Complete Works of Molière, Delphi Classics, 2018.

7. Visty Banaji, A man (of HR) for all seasons, People Matters, 10 May 2024.

8. Carolyn Dewar, Scott Keller and Vikram Malhotra, CEO Excellence: The Six Mindsets That Distinguish the Best Leaders from the Rest, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, 2022.

9. Alfred Rappaport, Creating Shareholder Value: A Guide for Managers and Investors, Free Press, 1997.

10. Jesse Fewell, Untapped Agility: Seven Leadership Moves to Take Your Transformation to the Next Level, ReadHowYouWant, 2020. 

11. Amir Hartman, Ruthless Execution: What Business Leaders Do When Their Companies Hit the Wall, Financial Times / Prentice Hall, 2003.

12. Chip Cleary and Tom Hilgart, The CEO's Talent Manifesto: Align Talent Investments to Achieve Targeted Results, Aligned To Business Publishing, 2013. 

13. Visty Banaji, Fairness is Fundamental, Angry Birds, Angrier Bees – Reflections on the Feats, Failures and Future of HR, Pages 479-487, AuthorsUpfront, 2023.

14. Visty Banaji, HR’s Business Should Be Happiness Raising, Angry Birds, Angrier Bees – Reflections on the Feats, Failures and Future of HR, Pages 488-496, AuthorsUpfront, 2023.

15. Immanuel Kant, Trans. Allen W Wood, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals: With an Updated Translation, Introduction, and Notes, Yale University Press, 2002.

16. Christopher Hill, The Century Of Revolution: 1603-1714, Routledge; 2nd edition, 1980.

17. Richard Lawrence Ollard, Pepys: A biography, Pan Books, 1977.

18. Christopher Hill, The Century Of Revolution: 1603-1714, Routledge; 2nd edition, 1980.

19. Visty Banaji, There is an Elephant in the Room, Angry Birds, Angrier Bees – Reflections on the Feats, Failures and Future of HR, Pages 163-169, AuthorsUpfront, 2023.

20. Visty Banaji, Diversity Delivers Dividends, Angry Birds, Angrier Bees – Reflections on the Feats, Failures and Future of HR, Pages 503-510, AuthorsUpfront, 2023.

21. Visty Banaji, A hierarchy of organisational needs, People Matters, 10 September 2024.

22. Theodore Parker, Ten Sermons of Religion, Crosby, Nichols, and Co., 1853.

23. Michael Grothaus, How "Blind Recruitment" Works And Why You Should Consider It, Fast Company, 14 March 2016.

24. Visty Banaji, (R)evolutionary Thinking, Angry Birds, Angrier Bees – Reflections on the Feats, Failures and Future of HR, Pages 245-252, AuthorsUpfront, 2023.

25. Visty Banaji, There is an Elephant in the Room, Angry Birds, Angrier Bees – Reflections on the Feats, Failures and Future of HR, Pages 163-169, AuthorsUpfront, 2023.

26. Visty Banaji, Entrance exams have failed: The solution is simple, People Matters, 9 August 2024.

27. Abraham Lincoln, Address to the Wisconsin State Agricultural Society, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 30 September, 1859.