.jpg)
The Rise and Retreat of Corporate DEI: How the Conversation Is Changing
The 2020 murder of George Floyd triggered one of the largest racial justice movements in modern history. Protests and activism spread across the United States and beyond, pushing organizations of all kinds—from grassroots groups to major corporations—to publicly address inequality. Many companies responded by expanding their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, promising billions of dollars in investments aimed at improving representation and advancing opportunities for historically marginalized communities.
For several years, DEI initiatives became a defining feature of corporate culture. Businesses introduced diversity hiring targets, leadership development programs for underrepresented groups, and public commitments to racial equity and gender equality. However, by the mid-2020s, the momentum behind these initiatives began to shift.
A turning point came in 2023 when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down affirmative action policies in college admissions. The decision created ripple effects across corporate America, prompting legal and political scrutiny of workplace diversity programs. The landscape changed further when President Donald Trump, on the second day of his second term, issued an executive order reversing several federal DEI initiatives introduced during the Biden administration. This move signaled a broader shift toward what critics and supporters alike describe as an “anti-woke” agenda.
As the political climate changed, many companies began reevaluating their diversity strategies.
One prominent voice in the conversation is Lloyd Blankfein, former CEO of Goldman Sachs. In a recent interview discussing his book Streetwise: Getting to and Through Goldman Sachs, Blankfein suggested that some corporate DEI initiatives may have been counterproductive.
According to Blankfein, programs specifically designed for minority groups can unintentionally label participants as needing remediation rather than recognition for their talent. He argued that when companies frame initiatives in this way, it risks stigmatizing the very individuals the programs are meant to support.
“Special programs we ran for minorities at the firm were often counterproductive,” Blankfein said during the interview. “If you brand something a remedial program, you’re also branding the people who go into that program.”
Goldman Sachs itself has adjusted its approach. In recent years, the company removed several diversity-focused requirements and policies. Among the changes was the elimination of a rule requiring companies going public through Goldman Sachs to have at least two diverse board members. The bank also removed language referencing “racial equity” and “gender equality” from its diversity webpage and allowed previously announced diversity representation goals to expire.
A spokesperson for the firm explained that these changes reflect evolving legal conditions rather than a rejection of diversity entirely. The company maintains that diverse perspectives remain valuable and that its programs will continue to focus on attracting the best talent while complying with current regulations.
Goldman Sachs is not alone in rethinking its DEI strategy. Several major corporations—including Target, Walmart, and Pepsi—have scaled back or modified diversity initiatives in response to legal pressures and shifting political dynamics. Some of these decisions have sparked strong reactions, including consumer boycotts and criticism from civil rights advocates.
Yet the corporate landscape is far from uniform.
While some organizations are pulling back, others are reaffirming their commitment to diversity initiatives. Companies such as Apple, Costco, Delta, and Cisco have continued to invest in inclusion programs. Apple, for instance, maintains a dedicated racial equity and justice initiative aimed at expanding opportunities for Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and Indigenous communities. Meanwhile, Costco shareholders overwhelmingly rejected a proposal from conservative activists seeking to dismantle the company’s DEI programs.
Other firms are also adjusting how they approach inclusion. Delta has shifted its hiring practices to focus more on skills rather than formal degree requirements, potentially opening doors for candidates from nontraditional backgrounds. Cisco, meanwhile, has implemented diverse hiring panels to ensure a wider range of perspectives during recruitment.
Blankfein himself acknowledges that promoting opportunity remains important but believes the strategy should focus on broad improvements rather than targeted labels.
Instead of creating programs specifically branded for certain groups, he suggests investing in education, training, and career development initiatives that benefit everyone. Such programs, he argues, would naturally help individuals who face greater barriers without singling them out.
“The programs that you do to advance the careers and education for everybody—do those very well,” Blankfein said. “They’ll disproportionately help the people who need it most.”
The debate over DEI is unlikely to fade anytime soon. As companies navigate evolving legal frameworks, political pressures, and public expectations, the question is no longer whether diversity matters—but how organizations should pursue it in a way that is both effective and sustainable.