DEI efforts today face heightened scrutiny and resistance, often driven by far-right ideologies and anti-’woke’ discourse that misrepresent and delegitimise these initiatives as ‘reverse discrimination’. In this climate, brands have contracted support and pulled budgets for DEI initiatives. But research underscores why brands can’t afford to ignore DEI. A recent poll found that consumers are four times more likely to remain loyal to brands that support social issues.

Employees mirror this trend. Studies consistently show that employees increasingly expect their employers to take a stand on social issues: three-quarters in a 2019 survey, 65% in 2022, and 75% in 2023. According to the 2024 Voice of the Workplace report, 14% of respondents said they’d quit an organisation they perceived to be non-inclusive, and 20% said they wouldn’t even apply to a non-inclusive company.

But if brands are going to keep investing in DEI - they need to make sure it’s working. While much of the backlash stems from opposition to equity and inclusion itself, our White Paper DEI Disrupted: The Blueprint for DEI Worth Doing reveals a hard truth: some criticism is warranted, directed at DEI’s failure to deliver on its promises. As part of the research for our report our Lead Author, Rubie Eílis Clarke, spoke with global DEI leaders across industries, and the message is clear: traditional approaches to DEI are failing to create real change.

For brands, one of the most critical insights from the report is the urgent need for a Theory of Change for DEI. Too many organisations rely on scattergun strategies - reactive, disconnected initiatives driven by short-term pressures. A Theory of Change isn’t just corporate jargon or a stale document. Done well, it’s a strategic map that provides clarity and direction, uniting stakeholders around shared goals explicitly tied to measurable outcomes internally and externally. It surfaces underlying assumptions, establishes measurable indicators of success, and ensures that efforts are intentional and sustainable. For brands, the message here is simple: stop guessing and start planning.

But the failure to deliver on DEI's promise extends beyond a lack of strategic planning. It also stems from the absence of guiding principles - frameworks that ensure integrity, consistency and accountability in even the most challenging contexts.

We have seen the effects of unprincipled DEI: when Budweiser hired Trans actress Dylan Mulvaney in 2023 for a Bud Light campaign, it ended in a boycott by some customers, and then further boycotts from LGBTQIA+ communities in response to Budweiser’s failure to support Mulvaney in the face of a tsunami of online Transphobic violence. Mulvaney said herself: “For a company to hire a Trans person and then not stand by them is worse, in my opinion, than not hiring a Trans person at all”. The Human Rights Campaign subsequently warned Anheuser-Busch in a letter that its perfect Corporate Equality Index score was at risk without substantive action.

The White Paper also examines inconsistencies in brand responses to watershed crises, revealing a troubling pattern of uneven actions that highlight the absence of principled DEI decision-making frameworks. In 2020, brands made bold commitments to racial equity after the murder of George Floyd. In 2022, support for Ukraine was swift and visible. Yet, responses to Israel's war on Palestine have been marked by silence, or worse, the silencing of staff voicing support. Despite financial pledges and press statements for BLM and Ukraine - both causes deeply worthy of solidarity - we found no such commitments towards those in Gaza, at the time of writing. Post-publication we learned that Ben & Jerry’s - a brand with a long track record for their strong commitment to social justice issues - was silenced by its parent company, Unilever, from expressing solidarity with Palestine refugees. These disparities are not incidental: they reflect how geopolitical alliances and racisms shape profit-risk assessments that underpin Brands’ chosen positions. But here’s the thing: if equity is a core principle, it cannot be conditional.

Brands need principled DEI frameworks robust enough to guide decisions consistently, even (especially) in politically charged contexts. In DEI Disrupted, we offer a set of DEI principles to meet this need.

Confusion and fatigue around DEI are real. But neither justifies retreating wholesale. Instead, they demand we rethink how DEI is approached. At this critical juncture, DEI’s effectiveness and ability to withstand the headwinds hinges on brands’ ability to articulate clear, principled, and unconditional commitments - internally and externally. That means moving beyond chasing quick wins and adopting bold, principled strategies that can withstand scrutiny and deliver real results for marginalised staff as well as shifting our wider culture positively.

For brands serious about creating companies that are equitable, inclusive, and genuinely transformative, the path forward is clear. The only question left is: are you ready to walk it?