Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: History, Climate, Benefits, Challenges, and Creative Strategies

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 2023, 11, 780-794

https://www.scirp.org/journal/jhrss

ISSN Online: 2328-4870

ISSN Print: 2328-4862

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 Nov. 3, 2023 780

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: History,

Climate, Benefits, Challenges, and Creative

Strategies

Mussie T. Tessema

, Traci Hulback

, Jennifer Jones

, Ryan Santos-Leslie

, Kisha Ninham

Amy Sterbin

, Nathan Swanson

Department of Business Administration, Winona State University, Winona, MN, USA

Department of Business, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Wisconsin, MN, USA

Abstract

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) has become a popular topic in corpo-

rate culture over the past three decades. The number of companies attempt-

ing to diversify their workforce has increased; however, progress in equity

and inclusion has been slow. This study argues that workforce diversity is ne-

cessary but insufficient, as equity and inclusion are also important for effec-

tive DEI. This study aims to discuss the historical background of DEI in the

United States and its benefits and challenges and identify creative and inno-

vative strategies for ef

fective DEI. The implications and directions for future

research are also discussed.

Keywords

Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, DEI, Human Resource

1. Introduction

As the United States (US) population becomes more diverse, the workforce has

also become increasingly diverse in terms of gender, race, religion, age, sexual

orientation, and so on. Hence, the need to attract, develop, motivate, and retain

a diverse workforce has increased. Therefore, effective workforce diversity man-

agement or diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is vital for building a compe-

tent workforce.

While overall perceptions of workforce diversity were bad (−31%), those of

workforce inclusion were markedly worse (−61%) (Larson, 2017). These figures

indicate that even more diverse companies face challenges related to equity and

How to cite this paper:

Tessema, M. T.,

Hulback,

T., Jones, J., Santos-Leslie, R., Nin-

ham,

K., Sterbin, A., & Swanson, N. (2023).

Diversity, Equity, and Incl

sion: History,

Climate, Benefits, Cha

lenges, and Creative

Strategies

Journal of Human Resource and

Sustainability St

udies, 11,

780-794.

https://doi.org/10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044

Received:

September 20, 2023

Accepted:

October 31, 2023

Published:

November 3, 2023

23 by author(s) and

Scientific

Research Publishing Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative

Commons Attribution International

License (CC BY

4.0).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Open Access

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 781

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

inclusion. This study, therefore, argues that having diverse talent is not enough,

and more work must be done toward promoting equitable and inclusive

workplace experiences that impact the extent to which employees remain and

thrive. This study contends that diversifying the workforce is necessary but not

sufficient, in that companies need to acknowledge differences in people, combat

discrimination, recognize the value of each employee, and promote inclusiveness

(Herring, 2009; Ryan & Wessel, 2015). DEI programs require embracing and

valuing cultural differences in an organization’s strategic advantages. Hence, it

plays a significant role in creating a workplace that is diverse and inclusive (Noe,

Hollenbeck, Gerhart, & Wright, 2018).

Recognizing and valuing the contributions of each worker, regardless of their

background, is critical for creating an inclusive, thriving, and healthy work cul-

ture. Workers must feel welcome, valued, included, treated equally, and ac-

knowledged. Embracing workforce diversity in all forms and promoting an in-

clusive environment are necessary. In the past, the US was perceived as a “melt-

ing pot” of people from various countries, cultures, traditions, and backgrounds.

It was assumed that when people immigrated to the US, they would assimilate

into its culture. However, this assumption has proven to be complex because in-

tegration is difficult to implement (Tessema et al., 2017). This may require

companies to deliberate how to diversify their workforce and make them feel in-

cluded, valued, and embraced. Hence, DEI is not just about mirroring workers’

demographics but also about the emotional connection that workers feel to each

other and the company.

DEI programs play a considerable role in creating a work environment that

attracts and retains talent and fosters a sense of belonging, respect, and under-

standing among employees. The power of DEI programs lies in a company’s

ability to challenge the status quo and encourage members to think outside the

box. Employees who feel valued and included are more likely to be motivated,

engaged, and productive (Beraki et al., 2022). Effective DEI programs provide

several benefits, such as improving the ability to attract, motivate, and retain

qualified and experienced workers, enhancing decision-making, providing a

larger pool of ideas and experiences, promoting creativity and innovation, fos-

tering better morale, and communicating varying perspectives (Griffin & Phil-

lips, 2023; Kreitz, 2008). In other words, when a company has a diverse, valued,

and inclusive workforce, it is more likely to have different ideas and perspec-

tives, which, in turn, lead to critical discussions and foster creativity and inclu-

sion. Companies having effective DEI programs tend to be more effective than

those that do not (Forbes, 2011; McKinsey & Co., 2022; Meisinger, 2005; Parsi,

2017; Beraki et al., 2022). However, DEI’s benefits do not come without chal-

lenges; although there are advantages to DEI efforts, there are additional costs

associated with it. However, when successfully implemented, the benefits of DEI

exceed its challenges, as discussed.

Several studies have been conducted on different aspects of workforce diver-

sity. However, only a handful have discussed workforce DEI. Therefore, this

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 782

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

study intends to fill this research gap by discussing the history, benefits, and

challenges of DEI in the US and identifying creative and innovative strategies for

effective DEI.

This paper comprises five sections. Section one introduces the study. Section

two reviews the literature on DEI. Section three discusses the research metho-

dology. Section four discusses creative and innovative strategies for effective

DEI. Section five provides the study’s conclusions, implications, limitations, and

future research directions.

2. Literature Review

DEI is a relevant, timely, and critical HR issue. Although it is an increasingly

important HR aspect, it is also a complex workplace feature. DEI refers to an

organizational framework that promotes fair treatment and full workforce par-

ticipation (Verhulst & DeCenzo, 2022). DEI combines three related concepts

that have helped many organizations support diverse groups of individuals of

different ethnicities, races, genders, religions, and sexual orientations. DEI also

refers to three values that many organizations endeavor to adhere to in order to

help meet the needs of the organizational workforce from all walks of life

(McKinsey & Co., 2022). While diversity is concerned with the presence of va-

riety within the company’s workforce (e.g., ethnicity, religion, gender, disability,

national origin, age, sexual orientation, and culture), equity is concerned with

the concepts of fairness and justice within the same (e.g., fair and impartial HR

programs and practices and equal possible outcomes for every worker). In addi-

tion, inclusion concerns creating a company culture that creates an experience in

which all workers feel represented and experience a sense of belonging. DEI is a

policy or practice planned to make workers of different backgrounds feel wel-

come and ensure that they receive the required support to complete their work

to the fullest of their abilities (Soda, 2023; Urwin, 2023). A DEI strategy refers to

a comprehensive plan employed by companies to create and foster a workplace

that embraces it.

Workforce diversity has various narrow and broad definitions. For instance,

workforce diversity denotes the background of the organizational workforce in

terms of race, gender, age, ethnicity, and sexual orientation (Robbins, Coulter, &

Decenzo, 2020). It is also defined as any perceived difference among workers,

such as race, age, religion, profession, functional specialty, geographic origin,

lifestyle, and sexual orientation (Mondy & Martocchio, 2020), the differences

between workers on any personal attributes that influence how people view one

another (Gonzales & Denisi, 2009), or the interaction of different cultures,

backgrounds, and generations in the same organization (Richard & Johnson,

2001). According to Griffin and Phillips (2023), these definitions encompass the

primary and secondary dimensions of workforce diversity. While primary di-

mensions of diversity may refer to issues that influence early socialization (e.g.,

race, age, gender, ethnicity, physical and mental abilities, and sexual orienta-

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 783

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

tion), secondary dimensions may refer to significant issues that can be adapted

or changed (e.g., educational background, income, marital status, work expe-

rience, and religious beliefs) (Griffin & Phillips, 2023). The concept of workforce

diversity has been extended to include issues such as thinking style, personality

type, and other factors that affect how people view the world (Ryan & Wessel,

2015). Some of the characteristics of workforce diversity are highly/less observable,

highly/less job-related, task-related/relationship-oriented, and surface-/deep-level

dimensions (Christian, Porter & Moffitt, 2006).

From the above discussion, it can be argued that workforce diversity refers to

the ingredients, perspectives, and combinations of individuals. Workforce inclu-

sion refers to the extent to which workers feel that they belong, are accepted, va-

lued, and different. Hence, while diversity refers to simply having representa-

tion, inclusion refers to being invited to a table.

2.1. Benefits and Challenges of DEI

Effective DEI programs offer companies several advantages, such as generating

different viewpoints, which lead to different solutions to their problems (Griffin

& Phillips, 2023; Pieterse, Van Knippenberg, & Van Dierendonck, 2013), helping

in attracting, retaining, and motivating talents (Mayfield & Mayfield, 2010), pro-

viding companies with greater knowledge of the preferences and demands of

customers (Weiss, 2015), providing more effective and efficient service to cus-

tomers having different backgrounds (Kreitz, 2008; Ryan & Wessel, 2015), in-

creasing the number of generated ideas (Griffin & Phillips, 2023), encouraging

an environment that promotes creativity and innovation (Avery, Wang, Vol-

pone, & Zhou, 2013), meeting business strategic needs and the needs of custom-

ers more effectively (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2022), allowing employees to

feel desirable and have a sense of belonging (Kreitz, 2008), and improving com-

pany reputation and performance (Tessema et al., 2017; Weiss, 2015). In short,

companies have DEI programs not only for legal, ethical, and moral purposes

but also for business/economic reasons. Many studies have reported that com-

panies with effective DEI programs perform better than those without such pro-

grams (Forbes, 2011; Leonard, 2006; Meisinger, 2005; Parsi, 2017; Beraki et al.,

2022). For instance, McKinsey and Co.’s (2022) study shows that companies in

the top quartile for gender diversity in executive teams were 25 percent more

likely to be profitable than companies in the fourth quartile. Inclusive teams can

make better decisions up to 87 percent of the time (Larson, 2017). Eighty percent

of the executives reported that DEI increased profitability (Forbes, 2011). Com-

panies with ethnic and gender diversities tend to outperform those that do not

by 35 percent and 15 percent, respectively (McKinsey and Co., 2022). Approx-

imately one-third of companies that have embraced DEI have financially pulled

ahead of their competition. More diverse companies can be more innovative and

react more quickly to changing market trends (Dolan et al., 2020).

Although DEI programs have several benefits, there are also some challenges

such as communication-related challenges (e.g., language, perceptual, cultural,

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 784

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

and barriers), resistance to change-related challenges (the refusal of some em-

ployees to accept the cultural and social makeup of the workplace that has been

changing), and implementation-related challenges (obstacles in putting DEI into

effect) (Kearney, Gebert, & Voelpel, 2009). Bateman and Snell (2007) highlighted

the following five challenges faced by companies in implementing DEI programs:

lower cohesiveness, unexamined assumptions, communication problems, mi-

strust and tension, and stereotyping. For instance, Glassdoor (2020) reveals that

while 41 percent of the respondents do not believe that a diverse executive team

exists, 48 percent of them do not know of their company’s initiatives to increase

DEI. In addition, approximately 57 percent of them believed that their company

should take more initiative to increase DEI. These facts indicate that the progress

in DEI has been slow.

2.2. Historical Background of DEI

Approximately 100 years ago, the US began its journey toward diversity and in-

clusion. Until the 1920s, diversity and inclusion in the workplace were not man-

dated. The mainstream workforce was established for white men and did not

place value on minority and gender inclusion. This left women, people of color,

immigrants, and other disenfranchised groups without equal protection.

The Women’s Bureau was one of the original diversity and inclusion accom-

plishments of the US and still exists today within the Department of Labor. It

was established on June 5, 1920, a few months before the ratification of the 19th

Amendment, which granted American women the right to vote. Women entered

the workforce in large numbers and demanded protection to ensure not only

their welfare as employees but also opportunities for advancement. One of the

Women’s Bureau’s first and most notable successes in diversity and inclusion

successes was helping enact the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938, where

the Bureau documented wage inequality between Black and white women; they

also allowed women to sit for the Civil Service exam (US House of Representa-

tives, 2020). The US government took another step in implementing diversity

and inclusion through the desegregation of the armed forces, also known as Ex-

ecutive Order 9981, on July 26, 1948. During WWII, the US Army was the

country’s largest minority employer (US House of Representatives, 2020).

Over one million Black men and thousands of Black women served in the US

military during WWII. When the war ended, Black veterans were faced with the

reality that their Galvanized Iron benefits—the benefits created to help US mili-

tary veterans—would not be honored nationwide. The fight for diversity and in-

clusion within the armed forces pre-dates the war. In response to complaints

that Black people in the military were being discriminated against, President

Roosevelt issued Executive Order 8802 in 1941, which mandated that Black

people could be accepted into job training programs, outlawed discrimination by

defense contractors, and formed the Fair Employment Practices Commission.

After a failed attempt to persuade Congress to enact a law mandating diversity

and inclusion within the Armed Services, President Truman issued Executive

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 785

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

Order 9981 in 1948, which required equal treatment and opportunity for all in-

dividuals in the armed forces without regard to color, race, national origin, or

religion (US House of Representatives, 2020). President Kennedy initiated Af-

firmative Action 1961 through Executive Order 10925, requiring government

contractors to ensure that applicants were equally employed without considering

race, national origin, color, or creed. In 2014, President Obama expanded the

executive order to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and

gender identity.

In 1963, the US Congress issued the Equal Pay Act, which amended the FLSA

of 1938. This Act protected against sex-based wage discrimination. Perhaps the

most momentous diversity and inclusion enactment in American history is the

Civil Rights Act of 1964. It is a landmark Act that prohibits discrimination based

on sex, race, color, religion, and national origin. This essentially ended the Jim

Crow laws that had marginalized millions of Americans based on color, religion,

and national origin since the Supreme Court upheld Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896.

In 1967, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act was issued to prohibit dis-

crimination against Americans aged 40 and older. In 1978, the Pregnancy Dis-

crimination Act was introduced to prohibit discrimination against pregnant

women. In 1990, the American Disabilities Act prohibited discrimination against

qualified individuals with disabilities. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 was issued to

compensate individuals who were discriminated against based on their back-

grounds. In 1994, the Uniform Services Employment and Reemployment Rights

Act was enacted to protect individuals who returned from military service. In

2008, the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act was issued to protect

individuals with genetic problems. In 2009, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair-Pay Act was

issued to let victims of discrimination claim the wages they had lost. In June

2020, the US Supreme Court (Bostock v. Clayton Co.) ruled to protect members

of the LGBTQ community.

Diversity and inclusion in the private sector can attribute much of the

progress to federal legislation and policies over the last 100 years, particularly

since the 1970s. The 1960s produced several landmark laws and policies that re-

shaped the workforce and set the stage for implementing diversity and inclusion

in the 1970s. During this time, many Fortune 500 companies emphasized diver-

sity in their hiring to attract larger pools of talent (Williams, 2020). For the first

time, employers were drastically remodeling their employment and hiring efforts

to attract not only a new generation with different value sets than earlier genera-

tions but also minorities and women for roles and positions they previously re-

served for white men. The diversity and inclusion movement began to see the

benefits of the 1960s. For example, Vanderbilt University had its first Black

football player in 1969, its first Black graduate from Nursing School in 1970, its

first Black graduate from the School of Medicine in 1970, its first Black coach at

the Southeastern Conference of College Football, and its first Black person to

earn a degree from the School of Management (Vanderbilt University, 2023).

The trend of “firsts” continued throughout the 1970s and into the 1980s.

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 786

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

In the 1980s, the shift from industrial labor to skilled and technological labor

encouraged increased diversity and inclusion. The Industrial Era supplied con-

sistent employment for low-skilled labor and opportunities for inexperienced

people. However, in the 1980s, technological jobs consumed the labor market,

and, for the first time, skill became more important than the employees’ race,

gender, or creed. This creates more opportunities for minorities, women, and

other protected groups throughout the workforce.

In the 1990s-2000s, companies discovered a correlation between having a

workforce that reflects their consumer base; consumer brands began to realize

the value of workforce diversity that mirrored their customer base. This diversity

has a business impact (Williams, 2020). Consequently, more effort and resources

are placed into hiring, training, and retaining a diverse workforce, as it not only

relates to the consumer base but also fosters creativity and innovation, as a

workforce composed of individuals from diverse backgrounds is more dynamic.

In the 2010s, diversity and inclusion evolved from creating and sustaining di-

verse workforces that mirrored consumer bases to creating diversity leadership.

The Millennial generation that grew up knowing only diversity and inclusion

entered the workforce with expectations of workforce diversity at the highest le-

vels of corporate America (Williams, 2020). This expectation of the newest

members of the workforce encouraged many Fortune 500 companies to develop

employee resource groups (ERGs), which are voluntary, employee-led groups

whose objective is to foster a diverse and inclusive workplace.

Although we have made progress with DEI in the workplace, there is still a

long way to go. Many companies in the past few years have made public state-

ments on their commitment to DEI but have failed to live up to it. Most failures

start at the top level with upper management, who are not truly buying into the

change and integrating it into their mission statements, core values, and com-

pany culture. In the past few years, we have seen companies issue statements in

support when they think it will positively affect profits; however, there is no ac-

countability ensuring that they follow through. We have also seen that compa-

nies only make statements on DEI support when faced with social backlash, es-

pecially in the current era of social media.

However, it is not just in the workplace that we are seeing the upper manage-

ment not standing behind diversity and inclusion training; we have also seen

people in positions of power within the government making statements against

DEI training. For example, US Senator Jeremy Trebas (Montana) sponsored a

bill called the Montana Individual Freedom Act. This bill “would prohibit DEI

training as a condition of state employment if the training is aimed at having the

employee believe that a group of people are responsible for and must feel guilt,

anguish, or other forms of psychological distress, for historical injustices” (Han-

son, 2023). Trebas believes that “diversity training is getting too political” and

that “we need to work on definitions, then talk about what is appropriate to train

and to whom we should be training on these topics” (Hanson, 2023). By prohi-

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 787

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

biting and limiting diversity training, we are moving away from making mea-

ningful changes within the workplace and our communities. If we cannot get our

leaders to set the tone to help us move forward positively, we cannot create pro-

ductive environments for people to be the best versions of themselves. When

people feel accepted and can be the best versions of themselves, they will flou-

rish, and we will see that spread to other people around them and in our com-

munities and workplaces.

Some companies think their DEI training works only because they invest

more money in DEI. These companies are missing an important piece, that is,

talking and listening to employees about what they need from their employers.

For example, in 2022, while 84 percent of the CHROs reported that their organ-

ization’s investment in DEI is increasing equality in their workplace, only 31

percent of the surveyed employees reported that their organization is committed

to improving equality or racial justice in their workplace (Brecheisen, 2023).

The above findings imply a disconnect between the real perception of the

CHROs and employees. While employers state that they are making changes in

their DEI, employees do not see meaningful progress (Brecheisen 2023). Many

employees do not feel respected, included, or valued (Brecheisen, 2023). Leaders

may think that they are making changes based on the amount of money they

spend, but, in reality, there is no observable effect. This is a confirmation for

companies that something is wrong with them. This is something that compa-

nies should address immediately, attempt to build a safe work environment, and

make meaningful changes within the company. There is no one way to fix DEI

issues within companies in our current state; most companies are making ge-

neric statements of support and commitment to make changes within DEI but

have failed to consider the actual issues lying within their companies and figure

out how to make real change.

While much progress is to be made across different organizations, some

companies are standing behind their DEI statements and continually working on

improving DEI within their companies. Companies such as TD Bank, Progres-

sive, and TIAA are the top three rank holders among DEI practitioners (e.g., the

presence of ERGs, the publication of diversity data, and the percentage of wom-

en in board and executive roles) (Peachman, 2023). These companies attempt to

maintain fair and inclusive workplaces. They have been working to ensure that

their employees feel valued, recognized, included, and listened to, and it is not a

monthly or quarterly sit-down, primarily because of their corporate culture,

which values DEI. Companies that rank high in their DEI listen to their em-

ployees and put them first. They hear what they are being told, and they act

upon it. The employees are the sun, and the company revolves around them.

This is counterintuitive to traditional management, but those tactics no longer

work in the modern job market. Employees want to enjoy their working envi-

ronment and give their best every day. To do so, they want a voice in the com-

pany and to be respected and treated like an adult, not a child.

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 788

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

3. Research Methodology

In conducting this study, we primarily used secondary resources; thus, this study

can be considered a literature review. We reviewed articles and books related to

DEI with the help of Google Scholar and Internet resources.

4. Creative and Innovative Strategies for DEI

Every person, business situation, and culture is unique; thus, no one size fits

every situation, and no simple procedures exist for effective DEI. The following

strategies can help companies create and foster workplaces that embrace DEI or

improve its effectiveness. Although achieving DEI goals is difficult, the following

creative and innovative strategies can help companies in their efforts toward rea-

lizing such goals.



The support and commitment of upper managers to DEI

When upper managers believe in the positive contributions of DEI, they are

more likely to support and commit to DEI efforts by allocating sufficient time

and funding resources, creating value, and maintaining their faith (Dessler,

2020). As Tessema et al. (2017) argue, leaders and managers must commit to ac-

tive, personal, and visible involvement in DEI, supporting it at all leadership le-

vels. The support and commitment of senior managers to DEI play a critical role

in successful DEI efforts. When a CEO issues an inclusive statement, it is more

likely to have a significant impact on DEI. Creating a lasting inclusive culture

and advancing inclusive behavior is vital. Upper managers’ support and belief,

on the one hand, can help staff managers who support DEI initiatives. On the

other hand, their support helps motivate HR and line managers to consider DEI

in all HR-related decisions such as recruitment, hiring, training and develop-

ment, promotion, placement, and pay and benefits. Commitment to DEI begins

with the development of a clear strategy to hire, promote, and retain diverse

groups of the population. Companies can diversify their workforce by attracting

a diverse pipeline of applicants using different recruitment methods and by col-

laborating with schools, colleges, and universities. Recruiting minority groups to

the board of directors and interacting with representatives of minority groups

and networks can help in the efforts made for workforce diversity. In addition,

diversifying chief diversity officers is necessary. Champions in DEI programs are

also needed. DEI champions are organizational members who take action to en-

sure that DEI goals are achieved by making it an everyday reality (Pieterse et al.,

2013). They must challenge traditional ways of doing things.



Developing SMART DEI objective

Companies with specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound

DEI goals are more likely to make good progress toward DEI. Having such goals

can push organizations to recognize how far they have progressed and what

needs to be done. Any organization on the path to achieving DEI goals can hit

roadblocks, but it is how companies learn and adapt to these situations that ul-

timately determine success.

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 789

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

 Creating a welcoming work environment

Creating an environment that makes diverse groups of the workforce feel res-

pected and welcomed is critical to achieving DEI goals. Companies must develop

HR policies that help create a conducive work environment for DEI. Such

workplaces can help employees feel included, valued, respected, and embraced.

For example, creating ERGs can help minorities and women get colleagues to

confide in a place where they feel respected, important, and comfortable and

experience a sense of belonging. Effective ERGs can help minority employees

connect better with each other and provide social support, mutually beneficial

information, coaching, and mentoring (Joshi, Liao, & Jackson, 2006; Herring,

2009; Meinert, 2018). Encouraging workers to participate in ERGs is also neces-

sary, and their power should be embraced. Offering training, coaching, and

mentoring to underrepresented ERG groups can help them feel valued, wel-

comed, and included. Embracing DEI in all forms and promoting an inclusive

environment are necessary.



Developing, communicating, implementing, and assessing DEI strategies

When a company develops, communicates, implements, and assesses its DEI

strategy, it is more likely to have effective DEI programs. The presence of a

clear and implementable DEI strategy can help progress toward DEI efforts.

Prior to developing a DEI strategy, companies must review their existing situa-

tion using employee attitude surveys and focus groups, which also help them

determine areas for improvement. As underlined by Schneider’s (1987) Attrac-

tion-Selection-Attrition hypothesis, companies are likely to recruit, hire, and re-

tain similar types of workers. This natural tendency to eliminate DEI suggests

that companies need to proactively develop DEI policies to ensure company he-

terogeneity. The process of implementing strong DEI practices requires buy-in

from all stakeholders in the organization. Companies are more likely to take the

initiative to facilitate DEI when there is a clear and implementable strategy. This

helps companies incorporate HR policies and practices that reinforce DEI (Kir-

ton & Greene, 2016; Rock, 2017), which, in turn, can make the workforce feel in-

cluded and accommodate their needs and preferences.



Integrating DEI training that supports DEI strategies

DEI training can help make workers and managers more aware of the value of

differences in the workforce and the problems linked to stereotypes. This can help

managers understand that DEI provides a competitive advantage when managed

effectively. This can help prepare managers to recognize and embrace differences

among their employees and foster mutual respect and understanding. Moreover, it

can make workers aware of unconscious bias, develop open-mindedness and cul-

tural awareness, sensitize workers to value differences, and take action to miti-

gate them (Mondy & Martocchio, 2020). Companies need to integrate training

that supports DEI strategies to fully incorporate workers into their company’s

culture and increase workers’ sensitivity to differences in the workforce. More

effort and resources need to be placed into DEI training.

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 790

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

 Creating ways for workers to voice their concerns

Companies must allow their workers to voice their concerns about the com-

pany’s DEI without fear of retaliation, and managers need to make efforts to re-

spond to such concerns. Moreover, encouraging workers to share their stories

can help companies. Hence, companies must prioritize open communication.

When workers have unique voices, they are more likely to feel included and va-

lued. Listening is the most basic skill to start with, which can direct the course of

DEI and rejuvenate the companies. Companies must encourage ongoing discus-

sions regarding concerns, successes, and suggestions. This will help managers

understand their expectations as well as be able to help their employees embrace

the new policies. In the beginning, many will remain skeptical and continue on

their old paths because of the fear of being reprimanded. If the company remains

true to its new path, employees will eventually embrace it. The overall goal is to

create a positive, comfortable, and safe work environment in which everyone

feels that they belong. Everyone is respected for their contributions and is

treated equally.

5. Conclusions and Implications of the Study and Directions

for Future Research

5.1. Conclusions and Implications of the Study

This study concludes that since the 1990s, US companies have become more di-

verse, primarily because of factors such as legislation, immigration, and a low

birthrate, which has led to high women participation in the labor force, and

business cases, encouraging companies to purposely diversify their workforce to

gain competitive advantage. However, there has been limited progress in equity

and inclusion. While US companies have paid proper attention to workforce di-

versity, they failed to give similar attention to equity and inclusion. This study

emphasizes that equity and inclusion are more complex than workforce diversi-

ty.

This study theorized that no ubiquitous approach to DEI exists. Instead, it in-

tends to bring important issues to the attention of managers and leaders and

adapt the suggested management strategies (the support and commitment of

upper managers to DEI, developing SMART DEI objective, creating a welcom-

ing work environment, developing, communicating, implementing, and assess-

ing DEI strategy, integrating training that supports DEI strategies, and creating

ways for workers to voice their concerns) to their unique work settings. The

proposed strategies can be used by companies to identify the areas that their ac-

tions should focus on to create a genuine DEI program. DEI has proven essential

for employees and their companies to thrive. To implement DEI strategies,

companies must understand what they are trying to achieve and why. There is

no simple answer for every company, but the bottom line is to take care of their

employees. Simply put, “profits are driven by customer loyalty, customer loyalty

is driven by employee job satisfaction, and employee job satisfaction is driven by

putting employees first” (Burkus, 2017: p. 33).

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 791

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

Companies must approach DEI as a business imperative. To this end, they

need to create a culture that fosters mutual respect and understanding and pre-

pare their managers to recognize and embrace differences among their em-

ployees. They need to value differences in the workforce not only because of

government laws, or it is ethically and morally the right thing to do, but also be-

cause it helps in building an effective workforce. This study contends that the

“melting-pots” assumption needs to be replaced by the recognition and celebra-

tion of differences. When companies celebrate differences in their workforce,

they are more likely to be successful than their competitors.

This study underscored that having an authentic workforce DEI program is

difficult. However, the proposed creative and innovative strategies can play a

significant role in companies’ efforts to have an effective DEI program. This

study also concludes that although genuine DEI goals require a lot of hard work,

given their benefits, companies should not ignore or discount the contributions

of DEI.

5.2. Limitations of the Study and Directions for Future Research

This study adds to the literature on DEI by extending prior research. This study

is valuable because, unlike most prior studies, it discusses the historical back-

ground of DEI in the US, its benefits and challenges, and strategies for enhanc-

ing the effectiveness of the DEI program. One of the major limitations of this

study is that it is focused on the case of the US; thus, the results of this study may

not be generalizable. Therefore, similar studies should be conducted in other

global regions. In future studies, scholars can investigate the perceptions of em-

ployees regarding their respective company’s DEI programs using the “social

listening” approach, because the subsequent findings can improve our under-

standing of the extent to which US companies have gone in their efforts to have

an authentic DEI program. Furthermore, conducting a case study of a compa-

ny’s DEI can help enhance our understanding of the benefits and challenges of

having an authentic DEI.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this

paper.

References

Avery, D. R., Wang, M., Volpone, S. D., & Zhou, L. (2013). Different Strokes for Different

Folks: The Impact of Sex Dissimilarity in the Empowerment-Performance Relation-

ship.

Personnel Psychology, 66,

757-784. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12032

Bateman, T. S. & Snell, S. A. (2007).

Management: Leading & Collaborating in a Competitive

(7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Beraki, M., Tessema, M., Dhumal, P., Ready, K., & Kelati, S. (2022). Exploring the Correlation

between Diversity and Financial Performance: An Empirical Study.

International

Journal

Business

Performance Management, 23,

206-223.

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 792

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2022.119578

Brecheisen, J. (2023, Mach 9). How Employees and HR Leaders Differ on Perceptions of

DEIB Progress.

Harvard

Business

Review

Burkus, D. (2017).

Under New Management: How Leading Organizations Are Upending

Business as Usual

. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Christian, J., Porter, L. W., & Moffitt, G. (2006). Workplace Diversity and Group Relations:

An Overview.

Group

Processes

Intergroup Relations, 9,

459-466.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430206068431

Dessler, G. (2020).

Human

Resource

Management

(16th ed.). Pearson.

Dolan, K., Hunt, V., Prince, S., & Sancier-Sultan, S. (2020). COVID-19 Still Matters.

McKinsey & Co.

Forbes (2011). Global Diversity and Inclusion: Fostering Innovation through a Diverse

Workforce.

Forbes

Glassdoor (2020). Glassdoor’s Diversity and Inclusion Workplace Survey.

https://www.glassdoor.com/blog/glassdoors-diversity-and-inclusion-workplace-survey/

Gonzales, J. A., & Denisi, A. S. (2009). Crosslevel Effects of Demography and Diversity

Climate on Organizational Attachment and Firm Effectiveness.

Journal

Organizational

Behavior, 30,

21-40. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.498

Griffin, R. W., & Phillips, J. M. (2023).

Organizational Behavior: Managing People and

Organizations

(14th ed.). Cengage.

Hanson, A. B. (2023, March 20).

Montana Senator Wants to Block Mandatory Diversity

Training

. AP News.

https://apnews.com/article/diversity-equality-inclusion-training-wokemontana-6b6a78

0bee8abcbe3d59500f5f9b4826

Herring, C. (2009). Does Diversity Pay? Race, Gender, and the Business Case for Divesity.

American Socialogy Review, 74,

208-224. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400203

Joshi, A., Liao, H., & Jackson, S. E. (2006). Cross-Level Effects of Workplace Diversity on

Sales Performance and Pay.

Academy

Management Journal, 49,

459-481.

https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.21794664

Judge, T. A., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2022).

Staffing

Organizations

(9th ed.).

McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Kearney, E., Gebert, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2009). When and How Diversity Benefits Teams:

The Importance of Team Members’ Need for Cognition.

Academy

Management

Journal, 52,

581-598. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.41331431

Kirton, G., & Greene, A. (2016).

The

Dynamics

Managing

Diversity:

Critical

Approach

(4th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315767147

Kreitz, P. A. (2008). Best Practices for Managing Organizational Diversity.

The

Journal

Academic Librarianship, 34,

101-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2007.12.001

Larson, E. (2017 Sep. 21). New Research: Diversity + Inclusion = Better Decision Making

at Work.

Forbes

https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriklarson/2017/09/21/new-research-diversity-inclusion-

better-decision-making-at-work/?sh=1f440e74cbfa

Leonard, B. (2006, Febrary). Gallup: Workplace Bias Still Prevalent.

Megazine

Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2010). Developing a Scale to Measure the Creative

Environment Perceptions: A Questionaire for Investigating Garden Variety.

Creativity

Research Journal, 22,

162-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2010.481511

McKinsey & Co. (2022, August 17).

What Is Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

? McKinsey

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 793

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

& Co.

https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/what-is-diversity-eq

uity-and-inclusion

Meinert, D. (2018). Full Expression: How Corporate Leaders Are Encouraging Sensitive

Conversion on Race and Religion At Work.

HR Magazine, 62,

37-43.

Meisinger, S. (2005). Diversity Pays Financially as Well as in Other Ways.

Focus, 82,

Mondy, W., & Martocchio, J. (2020).

Human

Resource

Management

(15th ed.). Pearson.

Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. M. (2018).

Human

Resource

Management:

Gaining

Competitive

Advantage

(10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Parsi, N. (2017). Diversity and Innovation: Meet Five Leaders Who Have Inveneted New

Approaches to D &I.

HR Magazine, 62,

39-45.

Peachman (2023, April 25). Meet America’s Best Employers for Diversity 2023.

Forbes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelpeachman/2023/04/25/meet-americas-best-employ

ers-for-diversity-2023/?sh=21a8e54150af

Pieterse, A. N., Van Knippenberg, D., & Van Dierendonck, D. (2013). Cultural Diversity

and Team Performance: The Role of Team Member Goal Orientation.

Academy

Management Journal, 56,

782-804. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0992

Richard, O. C., & Johnson, N. B. (2001). Understanding the Impact of Human Resource

Diversity Practices on Firm Performance.

Journal

of Managerial Issues, 13,

177-195.

Robbins, S., Coulter, M., & Decenzo, D. (2020).

Fundamentals

Management

(11th ed.).

Pearson.

Rock, D. (2017). A Brainy Approach.

Magazine, 62,

43-45.

Ryan, A. M., & Wessel, J. L. (2015). Implications of a Changing Workforce and Workplace

for Justice Perceptions and Expectations.

Human Resource Management Review, 25,

162-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.001

Schneider, B. (1987). The People Make the Place.

Personnel Psychology, 40,

437-453.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x

Soda, K. S. (2023). Leadership and Its Impact on Equity, Diversity and Inclusion: A

Literature Review and Analysis.

Open

Access Library Journal, 10,

e9980.

https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1109980

Tessema, T., Ready, K.J., Vlack, A., Sahle, E., Stiller, E., & Theis, S. (2017). Workforce

Diversity Management, the Case of Mayo Clinic.

Strategic

Management Quarterly, 5,

5-15. https://doi.org/10.15640/smq.v5n1_2a2

Urwin, M. (2023, August 16).

What Does Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (Dei) Mean in

the Workplace

? Built In.

https://builtin.com/diversity-inclusion/what-does-dei-mean-in-the-workplace

US House of Representatives (2020, June 2).

Centennial of the Department of Labor

Women’s Bureau: History, Art & Archives

. U.S. House of Representatives.

https://history.house.gov/Blog/2020/June/6-2-womensbureau/

Vanderbilt University (2023).

Timeline of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Efforts at Van-

derbilt

. Vanderbilt University.

https://www.vanderbilt.edu/diversity/vanderbilt-equity-diversityand-inclusion-timelin

Verhulst, S. L., & DeCenzo, D. A. (2022).

Fundamentals

Human

Resource

Management

(14th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Weiss, H. (2015). Capitalist Normativity: Value and Values.

Anthropological Theory, 15,

M. T. Tessema et al.

DOI:

10.4236/jhrss.2023.114044 794

Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies

239-253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499614560353

Williams, S. (2020, February 25).

Stacey Williams on LinkedIn: Evolution of Diversity in

the Workplace

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/evolution-diversity-workplace-stacey-williams/