From classrooms to boardrooms: The business argument for keeping DEI | Opinion

As the Kentucky General Assembly yet again gears up to debate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in higher education, the conversation could hardly come at a more critical time. State universities like University of Kentucky and Northern Kentucky University already dismantled DEI offices, and many prominent companies with large Kentucky presences like Walmart, Toyota and Ford are rolling back DEI initiatives in the face of mounting political pressure. However, as we witness the formal mechanisms of DEI being withdrawn, it is necessary to justify why these initiatives are vital — not as moral imperatives, but as economic necessities for both academic institutions and the business organizations.

There is a wealth of research demonstrating that diversity in the workplace directly relates to enhanced performance and profitability. McKinsey & Company’s studies have shown that companies with more diverse teams are not only more innovative but also outperform their homogenous counterparts in terms of financial returns. A diverse workforce brings a multitude of perspectives, making organizations more adaptable to changing markets and more creative in their problem-solving. In an increasingly globalized economy, failure to embrace diversity can severely hinder a company’s ability to innovate and compete.

Additionally, DEI initiatives contribute directly to employee retention and engagement. According to research by Deloitte, employees who feel valued and included are more likely to remain loyal to their organizations, which reduces turnover rates and the substantial costs that come with hiring and training new staff. Engaged employees are also more productive, which further boosts the bottom line. For universities, this is not just an economic argument but a matter of fostering environments where all students, faculty, and staff can thrive, ultimately creating an academic ecosystem rich in ideas, talent, and opportunity.

From Critique to Constructive Action

Critics of DEI often argue that these practices can backfire, creating divisions rather than fostering unity, leading Rich Lowry in National Review to recently proclaim DEI as “poisonous hokum.” They claim that DEI initiatives may prioritize diversity over merit, leading to unfair perceptions and resentment. A recent study conducted in part by researchers at Rutgers University lends some experiment-based support to this view, finding that DEI training—which emphasizes the pervasive nature of racism in America, particularly within white culture—may actually increase intolerance rather than reduce it.

It is also likely true that poorly designed DEI programs, especially those that focus primarily on cultural identity, can create frustration among employees or students who feel their hard work and qualifications are being overlooked. The solution, however, is not to dismantle DEI programs, but to refine them. DEI should never be about sacrificing merit; it should be about creating an environment where all individuals have the opportunity to succeed—regardless of their race, ethnicity, sexual preference or orientation, or economic background. When DEI initiatives are implemented thoughtfully—emphasizing fairness, transparency, and meritocracy—they can enhance morale and build stronger, more cohesive teams and high-performance organizations.

Other concerns about the costs of DEI programs emphasized by critics are also valid, particularly for smaller institutions or businesses with limited resources. However, the long-term benefits of a diverse, engaged workforce far outweighs the short-term expenses. When businesses and universities invest in DEI, they are investing in the long-term success and sustainability of their organizations. The risk of not doing so—losing top talent, failing to innovate, and falling behind in a competitive market—is far greater.

Investing in Inclusion

What we are witnessing today is a retrenchment, not just in higher education, but across industries, as powerful forces work to undo the progress made toward diversity, equity, and inclusion. The rollback of DEI initiatives in response to political pressure is a step backward for both economic growth and social cohesion. In this critical moment, we must take care not to “throw the baby out with the bath water.” Political expedience should not be an excuse to discard the valuable strides made through DEI efforts. Instead, it should inspire us to refine and strengthen our commitment to creating inclusive, equitable environments where all individuals have the opportunity to excel.

In Kentucky and beyond, as DEI offices close and political battles rage, the conversation should not solely focus on what is being dismantled but on what we stand to lose if we allow the fundamental principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion to fade into the background. DEI, when executed with care and attention to balance, is not a moral responsibility—it is an economic one. It is an investment in the future of our institutions, our businesses, and our society. The real question we must ask ourselves is whether we are willing to sacrifice this investment in the name of political expediency or if we are committed to fostering a future that is truly diverse, inclusive, and economically strong.

Ken Miller is the former provost and current professor of management at Sullivan University. He also currently serves on the ACLU of Kentucky board of directors. His views are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Sullivan University or the ACLU of Kentucky.