SHRM Drops 'E' from DE&I: What Does It Really Mean?
Unpacking the Implications of SHRM's New "Inclusion-First" Approach.
In a world where acronyms seem to hold as much power as actual actions, SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management) has decided to make a "strategic" change.
As announced yesterday, SHRM will now lead with "Inclusion" by adopting the acronym "I&D" instead of "IE&D."
But is this change genuinely meaningful, or is it just another buzzword-laden move to appease critics and the general public?
It’s hard to embrace the former when the announcement includes the following:
“By emphasizing Inclusion-first, we aim to address the current shortcomings of DE&I programs, which have led to societal backlash and increasing polarization.”
Inclusion Over Everything?
Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., SHRM President & CEO, has stated, "We'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."
It's a noble sentiment, but is it realistic?
More importantly, does it genuinely address the deeply rooted issues within workplace environments, or is it simply a rebranding exercise?
The announcement claims:
"Effective immediately, SHRM will be adopting the acronym 'I&D' instead of 'IE&D.' This strategic decision underscores our commitment to leading with Inclusion as the catalyst for holistic change in workplaces and society."
The Reality of DEI Programs
The announcement boldly asserts that this shift will "address the current shortcomings of DE&I programs, which have led to societal backlash and increasing polarization."
This statement raises a critical question: is the problem with Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DE&I) programs truly their structure, or is it their implementation?
While the promise to integrate Equity under the broader Inclusion framework is being celebrated by some on SHRM’s LinkedIn page, it seems more like a step backward by diminishing its importance.
Equity is a complex issue that requires its own focus, not just a subcategory under Inclusion.
The illustration below, shared yesterday in a LinkedIn post by Morgan Williams, frames how equity creates a level playing field for all.
Yet “equity” became a boogeyman to those voices pushing back against DEI, so perhaps this move is indeed more of an optics play?
A Shift or a Shuffle?
SHRM assures us that "our commitment to advancing Equity remains steadfast. Equity will be integrated under the broader Inclusion framework, continuing to be a priority in our strategy and leadership decisions."
This sounds like an attempt to placate critics while making minimal actual changes.
If Equity was genuinely a priority, would it not deserve its own space rather than being tucked under another category?
The emphasis on leading with Inclusion may address some of the societal backlash, but it also risks oversimplifying the complex dynamics of workplace diversity and equity.
Inclusion is vital, but without equally prioritizing Equity and Diversity, the approach could fall short of its lofty goals.
Follow The Money
This shift to an "Inclusion-first" approach may be a calculated move to appeal to companies that have been skeptical of DE&I initiatives, as noted by Victorio Milian.
By simplifying the acronym and focusing on Inclusion, SHRM might be attempting to rebrand in a way that seems less threatening and more palatable to those resistant to comprehensive equity and diversity efforts.
What Does This Mean For You?
SHRM's announcement of a shift to "I&D" from "IE&D" seems more like a strategic rebranding than a substantial change.
Those committed to this work will remain committed to this work.
Regardless of the acronyms in vogue, or “hopscotching of letters,” as Torin Ellis framed, HR practitioners must remain steadfast in their commitment to building companies where all employees are embraced and given opportunities to grow.
Real progress hinges on substantive actions and policies, not just rebranding efforts, to create workplaces where everyone genuinely belongs and thrives.