As the Trump administration takes aim at inclusion, equity and diversity (IE&D) initiatives, new research shows that most businesses are not yet making significant changes to their programs and commitments. Nearly half (49%) of C-suite leaders are not considering new or further rollbacks of their IE&D programs as a result of Trump executive orders targeting IE&D and only 8% are seriously considering changes.
That’s according to the 2025 Inclusion, Equity, and Diversity C-Suite Survey Report, recently released by Littler, the world’s largest employment and labor law practice representing management.
Mixed Outlook on Impact of Anti-IE&D Policies
With corporate IE&D programs in the regulatory crosshairs, just 53% of C-suite leaders surveyed after the inauguration say the Trump administration’s anti-IE&D policies and/or rhetoric are likely to decrease corporate commitments in 2025. While this is a 15-percentage-point jump from the pre-inauguration survey result, it still leaves 47% of executives expecting to see commitments remain the same or even grow as IE&D becomes increasingly polarized.
Overall, most executives are following a “wait-and-see” approach to adjusting programs and commitments. Six in 10 respondents (60%) say their organizations are awaiting further developments on the new administration’s IE&D priorities, including enforcement plans, before making any changes.
Even though many companies are not retreating from their IE&D programs, they are increasingly aware of the risks. More than half (55%) say they are more worried post-inauguration about the risk of IE&D-related lawsuits, government enforcement actions and shareholder proposals. Such fears are even more widespread among those that are highly visible targets for regulators, including federal contractors (74%), public companies (67%) and large employers (65%).
The first weeks of the new administration have forced business leaders to reckon with new and complex considerations as they weigh how — or even whether — to continue to pursue core aspects of their IE&D programming. Despite the increased scrutiny, many companies seem to be taking a measured approach, rather than rushing to end or scale back IE&D efforts. Leaders are looking for ways to balance legal risks with the value such programs provide to their workforces and company cultures.
Most Organizations Maintained or Increased IE&D Commitments in 2024
As anti-IE&D sentiment intensified in 2024, only 24% of respondents said their organizations decreased IE&D efforts to any degree, with the majority either maintaining (46%) or even increasing (30%) their commitments and activity levels since 2023. Approximately three quarters of those maintaining or increasing commitments said employee expectations played a role, suggesting that IE&D remains an important tool for attracting and retaining talent.
Nevertheless, that nearly a quarter of organizations scaled back IE&D commitments and activities in 2024 is a notable increase from last year’s survey report, when just 6% said the same. Concern about legal liability and litigation, including reverse discrimination lawsuits, was the most common reason, cited by 42% of those whose organizations decreased commitments.
Companies Adapt IE&D Strategies in Contentious Environment
With the new climate in Washington, many organizations appear to be avoiding what may be perceived as unnecessary risks — such as IE&D benchmarks and metrics — while still pushing forward with well-established activities that support their commitment to inclusion and belonging in the workplace.
Post-inauguration, organizations considering future rollbacks of IE&D programs are mainly focused on minimizing external communications, rather than eliminating programs. Nearly two-thirds (61%) say they are weighing whether to remove or reduce IE&D-related language from their websites, proxy statements and/or outward-facing communications.
Notably, only 22% of executives surveyed after the inauguration are currently considering reducing or eliminating IE&D-focused roles. Employee resource groups or affinity groups also appear to have staying power, with 53% pre-inauguration saying such groups are part of their IE&D programs and only 28% currently considering rollbacks.
Still, higher-risk elements of IE&D programs are facing real cuts: Fifty-two percent of those looking to downshift IE&D are considering whether to eliminate IE&D benchmarks and/or metrics, which could be viewed as quotas by federal agencies focusing in on potentially exclusionary or discriminatory practices. Similarly, 38% of this group is contemplating ending incentives or manager evaluation criteria tied to advancing IE&D priorities.
While the letter of the law governing IE&D programs remains unchanged, the risk of investigations and lawsuits is amplified by the Trump administration’s regulatory priorities. As a result, it’s more important than ever for private-sector companies to carefully review their IE&D practices for any potential vulnerabilities to guide compliance with longstanding anti-discrimination laws.
Jeanine Conley-Daves is a Littler shareholder and member of the firm’s IE&D Consulting Practice. She has represented many of the nation’s leading companies in employment-related disputes and workplace investigations.
Kate Mrkonich Wilson is a Littler shareholder and member of the firm’s IE&D Consulting Practice. She has successfully litigated employment discrimination, contract, and tort cases before juries and judges in both federal and state courts across the country.
Methodology
Littler’s pre- and post-inauguration surveys were completed by 347 and 340 C-suite executives, respectively, including chief executive officers, chief legal officers, and chief diversity officers across the U.S. Respondents represented a range of industries and company sizes, and the report breaks down the heightened concerns and distinct priorities of larger employers.
The research also analyzes how businesses have adapted their programs in the year since the first iteration of Littler’s survey released in January 2024 — a period of significant political and legal developments around IE&D that saw most organizations surveyed maintain or increase their IE&D commitments.
