President Donald Trump has issued executive orders to abolish diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) offices and positions throughout the federal government, and promised enforcement action against private-sector organizations that engage in DEI.
Elon Musk, who heads Trump’s new government efficiency office, has proclaimed that “DEI must die.” He and others propose to replace it with “MEI”, which stands for merit, excellence and intelligence.
We have been DEI practitioners for years and couldn’t agree more that the goal is to create meritocracies. But that’s not what we have now.
Creating meritocracy
For example, a tech startup we worked with rated all candidates on a rubric; they were shocked to find they were hiring White men with lower ratings than any other group. The company didn’t mean for that to happen, but it did. So if the goal is meritocracy, it’s something leaders need to create — not assume — once DEI is vanquished.
Today’s workplaces are overwhelmingly seen as meritocracies … by one group only. We know this from research we’ve conducted at the Equality Action Center (where Joan is director and Vernā is on the board).
In EAC’s most recent dataset, 91% to 94% of white men surveyed said they had a clear path for advancement, opportunities to work on assignments that will enhance their careers, and are satisfied with their jobs. Other groups don’t see it that way.
Many companies already know this. While the current anti-DEI crusade is definitely making some nervous, we don’t find them backing off well-designed initiatives to level the playing field, because they know those programs are connected to their prosperity.
These companies want to create cultures where many different kinds of people can thrive in order to connect with their customers, tap the full talent pool, and reduce their retention problems with women and people of color.
For example, an energy company that was having trouble retaining women asked the EAC to figure out why. Lack of access to opportunity was a big factor: Managers reported that fewer women than men worked on core technical products (a 13% difference) and high-profile assignments (a 17% difference).
Again, a company has to work toward meritocracy systematically. Here’s how we did that.
We made a list of all the high-profile assignments, as well as the less-valued work, and kept track of who did what for three months. We then ran a workshop explaining these findings to the managers, showing them the data that certain groups were getting far more opportunities.
Over the next three months, we collected the data again. The opportunity disparity was all but gone. It wasn’t that hard to level the playing field, but it didn’t happen automatically.
Unfair evaluations
Meritocracy isn’t automatic in performance evaluations either. Sifting through our database of more than 100,000 evaluations, we consistently find two major patterns.
First, women and people of color tend to get less constructive, and less honest, feedback than white (and, in some companies, Asian American) men. Second, white men get far fewer comments about their personalities.
And when they are difficult to work with, they often get a pass — “that’s just him.” Other groups do not; men of color receive by far the most negative personality comments. In one company the EAC worked with, 91% of people of color (but only 77% of white men) had personality mentioned in their performance evaluations. That’s pretty typical.
The fix is simple: Tell managers what to watch out for and drive them to the evidence. The best solution is to do a job analysis to identify what competencies are required in each job. But a job analysis (breaking every job down into specific competencies) can be an expensive proposition.
There’s a far cheaper approach: A manufacturing company simply had its managers list two or three competencies they considered crucial for each person they were evaluating, along with two or three pieces of evidence justifying their ratings. This had a powerful effect in leveling the playing field.
The Trump anti-DEI order doesn’t prohibit this, nor should it: Shifting from vague, unstructured evaluations to this approach resulted on average in 50% more evidence-based and 20% more action-oriented feedback to all groups of employees.
The idea won’t die
This gives the lie to a key assumption behind the push against DEI: that companies can’t level the playing field for women and people of color without lowering standards or discriminating against white men. The companies we’ve worked with clearly believed that rating all people on how well they achieved company goals would help the firm better achieve those goals.
We may need to change what we call diversity, equity and inclusion since the acronym is now freighted. How about the Meritocracy Initiative, or the Department of Excellence? But the ideas behind DEI won’t die for a simple reason: Organizations want and need to hire and promote the best people.
We’re all in favor of merit, excellence and intelligence. Let’s work together, using the tools that produce true meritocracies — and not skimp on the hard work required to create them.
Vernā Myers is CEO of the Vernā Myers Company and was vice president for inclusion strategy at Netflix. Joan C. Williams is director of the Equality Action Center and a distinguished professor of law (emerita) at the University of California College of Law, San Francisco.
First Published: February 1, 2025, 10:30 a.m.
