Anti-woke and gender backlashes in the corporate world: are your organisation’s diversity programmes at risk?

By Helena Wacko, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Researcher

In recent years, anti-woke sentiment has increased globally, leading to heightened scrutiny, backlashes and even outright rejection of previously valued equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) efforts. Certain media outlets have reported on major companies like Microsoft, Google, Zoom and Meta downsizing their EDI efforts.¹ PwC slashed its diversity goals following claims of illegality by US conservatives.² Prominent Danish company Chr. Hansen Holding withdrew their support to pride month and the LGBTQIA+ community.³

This growing criticism of EDI poses a threat to hard-won diversity gains and may potentially cause them to stall – or even reverse. In turn, we are seeing diversity goals shift from being an aspiration to becoming a risk factor, for some. Simultaneously, evidence and public support for EDI remains.

What does all this mean for leaders who are serious about accelerating gender equality? Is the rise of anti-woke and anti-gender sentiments putting corporate EDI at risk, and how deeply does the change take hold? And what are the specific implications for the gender equity agenda?

While the jury might still be out on the long-term future of EDI, political and legal challenges are certainly already reshaping the corporate diversity discourse. In this context, leaders in organisations must navigate these pressures with clear, actionable strategies to sustain their commitment to equity and inclusion. We’ll explore what leaders can do to navigate these pressures and protect gender equity in their organisations.

Where does the anti-woke movement come from? A shifting corporate and political climate

Anti-woke backlashes broadly target measures supporting minority groups and include prominent conservative voices criticising anti-bias training or claiming these efforts “discriminate against white people and men.”⁴ In the UK mining industry, for example, the EDI acronym, also known as ‘DEI’, has been derisively rebranded as “Didn’t Earn It”.⁵ However, political conflicts over social issues are far from new. These battles often begin with a small group of individuals who weaponise concepts to influence the public. The media often exacerbate rather than clarify the situation. The use of terms like “culture wars” in news articles (where language is deliberately misused to sow confusion and distract from genuine concerns) rose from 1,869 mentions in 2021 to 2,224 in 2022 in the UK. Unsurprisingly, recent data shows 42% of the public now considers being labelled “woke” an insult, up from 36% in 2022 and 24% in 2020.

However, the negative connotation surrounding the term “woke” does not always align with people’s actual values. In fact, most individuals express strong support for social justice and human rights, despite maintaining negative associations with “woke”. For instance, Britons are five times more likely to view EDI as positive and welcome concepts than oppose or be concerned by them.⁶ Thus, public perceptions of EDI differ significantly from how it is typically portrayed in media and political debates. In fact, research has found that people are more likely to believe political news when it leads them to adopt more extreme or incorrect beliefs. Therefore, we must remain vigilant about the willingness and commitment to EDI that is obscured and undermined in these polarising so-called culture wars.⁷

From overt to covert

Although the backlashes are creating notable tensions and unsettling corporate leaders, not all are fully reverting their EDI course. Instead, they are increasingly reluctant to use EDI language, laying low and generally undertaking their efforts in greater silence. This was evidenced by a US survey earlier this year, which found that almost one-third of executives surveyed have altered their description of EDI initiatives.⁸ Others are retreating to mere legal compliance in fear of backlashes.⁹ So, whilst the narrative on the actual retreat of EDI initiatives remains conflicting, the discourse of commitment is arguably fractured.

In this moment of polarisation, the importance of major companies and prominent business leaders affirming their commitment to EDI cannot be overstated. At the same time, we must remain vigilant of rogue political and business figures who recklessly stoke division. As consumers, employees, suppliers, and investors, we hold the power to mitigate the risks posed by such leadership.

This is particularly important, as any backtracking on EDI commitments – even if only through overt or vocal means – can have significant implications. Not only do marginalised employees’ risk further discrimination or exclusion, but it also risks sending a signal for another organisation to follow suit and ultimately makes the climate more difficult for those undertaking EDI work. It is worth noting that this is occurring as millennials and younger employees constitute more than half of the workforce in many places – representing the most diverse demographic to date.¹⁰ Thus, can employers really afford to retreat from the EDI agenda to ensure thriving workplace diversity?

The impact on gender – a lightning rod for backlash

While anti-woke sentiments oppose all minority inclusion efforts, the inclusion of women and gender minorities is a particular flashpoint for backlash in the corporate world, intensified by a surge in anti-gender attacks beyond the corporate sphere. The anti-gender movement takes issue with so-called ‘gender ideology’ – an umbrella term to describe the perceived problems of feminism and LGBTQIA+ rights. This year, the Annual Review of the Human Rights Situation of LGBTI People in Europe and Central Asia reported alarming levels of hate speech from politicians across 32 European countries over the past year, with transphobic rhetoric being particularly prevalent.¹¹

This wider political climate of gender backlashes has been accumulating for a while – from Hungary banning gender studies in 2018, to Bulgaria adopting a fast-tracked law banning the portrayal of LGBTQIA+ identities just this summer – and is undoubtably permeating gender equity efforts in the corporate sphere. As argued in a new and timely edition on rising anti-gender attacks, from the London School of Economics, while attacks on feminism are not new, “there is an intensity of aggression currently that emerges from the confluence of the alliance between the right and the targeting of women’s rights, LGBTQIA+ rights and migrant, black and minority rights”.¹²

The attack on gender is concerning and is not only polarising gender equity discourse. Perhaps it is too early to speak of ripple and long-term effects, yet the once-promising increase in women’s representation in senior corporate roles is already showing signs of slowing down. A March 2024 report from S&P Global reveals that the number of women in executive roles at major U.S. companies has declined for the first time in two decades, marking an “alarming turning point” for gender parity progress. The World Economic Forum gender gap report from 2023, mapped similar and consistent development beyond the U.S.

These developments, coinciding with continued rise of gender backlash and companies reassessing their real or perceived commitment to EDI efforts, are a cause for concern – and, more importantly, a call to action. On the other hand, the European Parliament approved EU legislation aimed at achieving gender balance on corporate boards, stipulating that by 2026, companies will be required to ensure that women make up 40% of non-executive directors or 33% of all board members. This demonstrates that the gender equity agenda remains and provides a glimmer of hope. Also, recent consumer and employee attitude surveys from Kantar and other major firms underscore the growing importance of supporting organisations that align with ethical values, including gender equity. And lastly, historical resistance to gender equity has shown that while progress may be delayed, persistence is key to advancing – after all, if gender equity efforts were not effective, there would be no reactionary backlash.

Pushing back on the pushback: recommendations

In this newfound and increasingly tense and altered landscape, EDI must be embraced more than ever. So, how can you provide a counter-narrative to stave the backlash and specifically address the gender needs of your organisation in an anti-gender climate?

1. Adopt a long-term perspective: Remember that the journey towards EDI is a marathon, not a sprint. The outcomes we seek are systemic and require sustained effort. Focus on the broader tapestry of change rather than getting bogged down by immediate setbacks or challenges.
2. Tailor EDI initiatives to your organisation: Move beyond generic “off the shelf” solutions. Customise EDI activities to fit the unique context and needs of your employer or institution. This tailored approach ensures relevance, engagement and greater impact.
3. Address anti-woke sentiment with clear communication: Develop and communicate a clear, consistent narrative about EDI that addresses and counters anti-woke sentiment. Focus on the tangible benefits of EDI for organisational success and individual well-being. Establish protocols to manage potential risks to your brand reputation and educate employees on the constructive aspects of EDI.
4. Focus on everyday inclusion experiences: Emphasise the real, day-to-day experiences of inclusion and exclusion within your organisation. Prioritising these tangible experiences over abstract debates can foster more meaningful conversations and actionable insights. For example, what are you doing to make sure your meetings are inclusive?
5. Cultivate a culture of curiosity and generosity: Promote a work environment centred around curiosity and generosity rather than personal criticism. Encourage open dialogue and a willingness to understand different perspectives, which can lead to more productive and supportive interactions.
6. Engage strategically with the C-suite: Develop a deep understanding of your executive stakeholders’ perspectives. Gaining their support is crucial for EDI efforts to succeed. Approach resistance as an opportunity to build stronger relationships and refine your strategy.
7. Prioritise strategic focus: Understand that while you may be capable of many things, you cannot do everything. Set realistic and achievable goals that align with your organisation’s broader strategy. Know your personal and professional boundaries and ensure that your efforts are both effective and sustainable.
8. Foster a supportive community: EDI roles can often feel isolating. Build a strong network with peers in similar roles to share insights, challenges, and support. Engaging with communities like Shape Talent’s Gender Equity Exchange can provide valuable connections and a safe space for candid discussions.

And lastly:

9. Leverage individual and collective power: Use your influence to advocate for EDI-focused decision-making in leadership appointments. Support and vote for leaders who champion gender equity and make informed choices in political and organisational contexts. Select your products, services, prospect employers and suppliers based on the same principle. Collective action can drive systemic change and ensure sustainable progress towards a more equitable world.

Ready to accelerate gender equality in your organisation? Shape Talent is an award-winning gender equity consulting firm with a vision to accelerate gender equality in business and beyond. Contact us today to explore how we can support your gender equity initiatives.

Helena Wacko is an Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Researcher at Shape Talent, the equity, diversity and inclusion experts for complex multinational organisations who are serious about gender equality – and what it can achieve for their business.

Click here to learn more about Shape Talent and join our mailing list to be the first to receive our tools, research, event invites and updates.

And be sure to follow us on LinkedIn:

References:

1. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/22/google-meta-other-tech-giants-cut-dei-programs-in-2023.html
2. https://www.ft.com/content/20d1646d-2039-40de-abe1-f2270830b01f
3. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://cphpost.dk/2023-06-27/news/top-danish-company-hugely-criticised-for-withdrawing-support-for-pride-due-to-us-threats/&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1725287003902749&usg=AOvVaw10N3bXHcVI4CqC5ntBXjcM
4. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.ft.com/content/5a69bc70-de6c-43ca-8cb7-5824e359110a&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1725287003904056&usg=AOvVaw1sNIfh1V6jMkW4JWL_HClC
5. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.ft.com/content/9497a658-9306-45ee-8adb-c5ccdf7a4f4b&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1725287003903415&usg=AOvVaw2eqTXTgVNEetprqSUTEMdH
6. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/mar/report-reveals-strong-public-support-edi-initiatives
7. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/apr/people-put-greater-trust-news-leads-them-be-more-politically-extreme
8. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/2024/07/17/dei-workplace-trump-vance-impact/74432633007/#:~:text=DEI%20efforts%20may%20be%20under,aren%27t%20retreating%20from%20commitments&text=The%20%E2%80%9Canti%2Dwoke%E2%80%9D%20backlash,inclusion%2C%20a%20new%20survey%20shows
9. https://www.ft.com/content/18a8e9c4-d515-4d9b-aac1-d88c02b46028
10. https://www.ft.com/content/18a8e9c4-d515-4d9b-aac1-d88c02b46028
11. https://www.ilga-europe.org/report/annual-review-2024/
12. Ojeda Güemes, Tomás & Holzberg, Billy & Holvikivi, Aiko. (2024). A Transnational Feminist Approach to Anti-Gender Politics. 10.1007/978-3-031-54223-7_1. Ojeda Güemes, Tomás & Holzberg, Billy & Holvikivi, Aiko. (2024). A Transnational Feminist Approach to Anti-Gender Politics. 10.1007/978-3-031-54223-7_1.