Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

DEI

Despite Billions In Backing, Studies Show Diversity Trainings Just Aren’t Working

Published

3 weeks ago

7 minute read

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Robert Schmad

A number of corporations are beginning to retreat from their diversity initiatives, with American Airlines, BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase and Lowe’s all editing their DEI policies to be less racially focused following lawsuit threats from conservatives.

A wealth of research suggests that the billions of dollars corporate America, academia and government agencies have spent on diversity training have done little to impact people’s behavior.

What impact diversity trainings do have is often short-lived or purely influences beliefs without impacting actions, according to a review of multiple meta-analyses, a type of research that summarizes the results of hundreds of studies. American businesses alone spend roughly $8 billion a year on the same diversity trainings research suggests are ineffective, according to the Harvard Business Review.

On top of the billions corporations spend on diversity trainings, hundreds of millions of dollars worth of public funds flow to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives through state universities and the federal government.

A 2020 meta-analysis synthesized findings from 492 different studies and found that trainings designed to reduce implicit bias, a term used by academics to refer to discriminatory attitudes people hold but are not consciously aware of, “generally produced trivial changes in behavior.” Per the study, the trainings had “relatively weak” effects on measures of implicit bias, however, it also found that changes in implicit biases didn’t necessarily translate to behavioral changes.

Many nonprofits, like the National Equity Project, provide diversity training services to public and private clients like businesses.

“Nonprofit spending on the left, roughly defined, swamps the center-right by a factor of three or four to one depending on the year … and yet the country hasn’t really moved much,” Capital Research Center Senior Investigative Researcher Ken Braun told the Daily Caller News Foundation, speaking on diversity training spending. “The very fact that DEI was ever created demonstrates the abject failure of decades of spending and messaging on what we used to call ‘affirmative action.’”

Diversity trainings may influence the stated beliefs of participants, but cause little change in day-to-day behavior. A study conducted by a team of University of Pennsylvania researchers in 2019 surveyed 3,000 employees at a multi-national company and found that the impact of anti-sexism training led to employees acknowledging that women face discrimination, but not changing the way they behaved.

The apparent inefficacy of diversity training hasn’t stopped bureaucrats from spending public funds on it, with a number of school districts and public colleges paying Ibram X. Kendi, the academic famous for popularizing the idea of “anti-racism,” tens of thousands of dollars for presentations. Roughly two-thirds of American colleges in 2016 had diversity training for faculty, and 43% of those trainings were mandatory, according to a survey conducted by researchers Frank Dobbin of Harvard University and Alexandra Kalev of Tel-Aviv University.

President Joe Biden signed an executive order in June 2021 ordering federal agencies to increase their diversity programming, asserting that “such training programs should enable federal employees, managers and leaders to have knowledge of systemic and institutional racism and bias.”

 

Questions surrounding the effectiveness of diversity trainings have existed for some time, with a 2009 analysis of hundreds of studies published in the Annual Review of Psychology failing to find evidence that diversity trainings are effective at reducing prejudice or influencing behavior in the ways intended.

Despite academics struggling to find evidence to support the efficacy of diversity trainings, many corporations leaned into such initiatives after the consulting firm McKinsey and Company published a report in 2015 claiming that companies with more diverse executives saw higher profits, according to the Wall Street Journal. Multiple academics, however, failed to replicate the results of the consulting firm’s study.

Repeating the studies of others is a common practice used in academia to determine if a result is reflective of reality or if it was the product of poor methodology or dumb luck. Econ Journal Watch (EJW), a publication run by economics professors, was among those that attempted to recreate McKinsey’s findings only to discover no statistically significant link between executive diversity and profitability.

“Caution is warranted in relying on McKinsey’s findings to support the view that US publicly traded firms can deliver improved financial performance if they increase the racial/ethnic diversity of their executives,” EJW’s report reads. “We are unable to replicate the same statistically reliable association between firm financial performance and executive race/ethnic diversity as they report.”

A number of corporations are beginning to retreat from their diversity initiatives, with American Airlines, BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase and Lowe’s all editing their DEI policies to be less racially focused following lawsuit threats from conservatives.

Braun called the apparent movement of corporate America away from DEI initiatives “encouraging” but laughed when asked if academia and the federal government might follow suit.

Other studies have found that diversity trainings don’t only fail to alter people’s behavior but sometimes produce backlash effects that make people more prejudiced. Dobbin and Kalev, in a book they co-authored, found that after implementing diversity trainings, firms saw a decrease in women and minorities in leadership positions.

“If diversity training has no impact whatsoever, that would mean that perhaps billions of dollars are being wasted annually in the United States on these efforts,” journalist Jesse Singal wrote in 2023. “But there’s a darker possibility: Some diversity initiatives might actually worsen the DEI climates of the organizations that pay for them.”

Featured Image: Benjamin Child/Unsplash

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Alberta / 46 mins ago

Danielle Smith confirms Alberta will introduce bill to ban men from competing in women’s sports

International / 6 hours ago

Elon Musk, JD Vance, others to appear at Trump’s return rally in Butler, PA, on Saturday

Alberta / 6 hours ago

Danielle Smith hits back at Liberal ‘gender’ minister who attacked Alberta’s pro-family legislation

DEI

CA school taught 5th graders gender identity, had them teach it to kindergartners

Published on October 3, 2024

By

From The Center Square

By 

Plaintiffs “were especially bothered that they had to push the idea that individuals can select their own gender to a kindergartener, knowing this kindergarten buddy looks up to them as role models and trusts their opinions.”

A California school district allegedly had a teacher teach a lesson and read a gender identity book to fifth graders, then have those fifth graders watch a video version of the book with their kindergarten mentees and teach them the lesson they just learned.

Outraged Encinitas parents are now suing the school district and demanding a notification and opt-out program for all objectionable content; currently, content notifications and opt-outs are only available for the health unit.

The fifth grade students’ parents had first asked to review a health unit with lessons on “puberty, health reproduction, media influences on health habits and body image, hygiene, boundaries and bullying and diseases and their transmission, including information about HIV/AIDS.”

After finding the unit’s  “instruction on gender identity and transgenderism” was “affront to their religious beliefs,” the parents tried to opt out of just the gender section, but were told they would have to opt out of the entire unit, which they did.

But this opt out did not cover the school’s buddy program that pairs older students with the same younger students every week for one class.

The lawsuit says “with the buddy relationships in place and well established, [school district staff] planned a unique event for May 1, 2024. During this “buddy” program, the District would use fifth graders to help kindergarteners learn about gender identity.”

The school district used My Shadow is Pink, a picture book for young children in which a boy “wonders about his gender and how he believes it differentiates from his father’s gender” and says he “loves wearing dresses and dancing around.” The boy wears a dress to school, making the father “anxious and stressed” until he too wears a dress after his son has a difficult day. The father then tells his child, “pick up that dress! Your shadow is pink. I see now it’s true. It’s not just a shadow, it’s your inner-most you.”

Before the buddy session, one staff member said to another, “We might just inspire some sweet things to fly toward their shadow tomorrow,” suggesting the lesson had a desired outcome, according to the lawsuit.

At the start of the session one teacher allegedly read the book to the fifth grade class, which students found unusual because “It was rare for [him] to read any book to them, and he had never read a book to them for the ‘buddy’ program.”

Immediately after, the fifth graders each sat next to their kindergarten mentees, and shown a read-along video version of the book, leading one 5th grade plaintiff to allegedly say “[he] wanted to cover his buddy’s eyes and ears to protect him.”

Next, 5th graders were allegedly told to have their buddies choose a color representing their buddies’ gender, and draw their buddies’ outlines in chalk in that color to communicate “gender was determined by an internal feeling.”

Both plaintiffs “were especially bothered that they had to push the idea that individuals can select their own gender to a kindergartener, knowing this kindergarten buddy looks up to them as role models and trusts their opinions.”

“The blatant promotion of gender identity in the My Shadow is Pink book is self-evident and obvious,” says the lawsuit. “The book is marketed as “a rhyming story that touches on the subjects of gender identity, equality, and diversity.”

A petition to require parental notification for controversial curriculum items at Encinitas Union School District, but the school did not respond to the petition or its concerns, aside from sending a template letter describing the district’s opt-out policy.

The lawsuit is claiming the students’ First Amendment  rights were violated by compelling them to speak messages to kindergarteners that violate their religious beliefs and consciences, and that the school districts’ policy of allowing opt-outs only in some parts of schooling but not in others is a violation of the 14th Amendment. Among other demands, the plaintiffs seek opt out and parental notification policies for “curriculum, activities, or any other instruction related to gender identity or other LGBTQ topics.”

“You have the absolute right to opt your child out of any program out there,” said Lance Christensen, Vice President of the California Policy Center, to The Center Square. Last month, the CPC issued an “opt-out toolkit” explaining to parents how they can protect and expand opt-out policies.

“These parents have the right to not have their children subjected to a radical ideology,” continued Christensen. “We’re talking about elementary school kids. What’s wrong with these teachers, and these schools?”

Continue Reading

Business

EXCLUSIVE: Investment Giants Leveraged Red State Universities’ Endowment Funds To Back Anti-Oil Agenda, Report Finds

Published on September 27, 2024

By

From the Daily Caller News Foundation 

 

By Jason Cohen

Several asset managers leveraged two major Texas university systems’ endowment funds to advance anti-fossil fuel shareholder proposals in 2022 and 2023, according to a report from the conservative watchdog group American Accountability Foundation (AAF).

BlackRock-owned Aperio Group, Cantillon, former Vice President Al Gore-chaired Generation Investment Management, GQG Partners and JP Morgan Asset Management collectively manage approximately $4 billion for The University of Texas/Texas A&M Investment Management Company (UTIMCO) as of July, which handles the university systems’ endowments. Despite the company’s policy against it and Texas’ status as the leading crude oil and natural gas-producing state, UTIMCO’s asset managers backed over 150 shareholder resolutions under the environmental, social and governance(ESG) umbrella, including proposals that could undermine the oil and gas industry, according to documents AAF obtained through a public records request and shared exclusively with the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Once again, woke ESG ideology has infected a public institution and hijacked its money for their own purposes. This is an outrageous betrayal of the public’s trust,” AAF president Thomas Jones told the DCNF. “[Republican Texas] Gov. Greg Abbott must take immediate action to end this nonsense. He must shake up the leadership at UT/A&M that let this happen and use his influence with UTIMCO to ensure that it never happens again.”

UTIMCO told the DCNF that the ESG and diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI)-related votes violate “a long-standing policy that prohibits using the endowments’ economic power to advance social or political agendas” and that a review found they consist of 0.3% out of around 45,000 proxy votes in recent years. The endowment manager added that it has since modified its guidelines after finding the violative votes and will impose them on all of its third-party investment managers before future proxy votes, and revoking voting authority for those that cannot follow them.

The company’s asset managers voted in favor of a total of 159 shareholder proposals between them that include “racial and gender pay gap reports, efforts to defund conservative candidates and pro-business trade associations, radical climate policy, targeting of gun purchasers, and proabortion initiatives,” according to the watchdog.

UTIMCO oversees the largest public endowment fund in the U.S., managing over $76 billion as of Aug. 31.

“UTIMCO’s mission is to ‘generate superior long-term investment returns to support The University of Texas and Texas A&M University Systems,’ yet these votes endorse political agendas that run contrary to the Systems’ best interests,” American Energy Institute CEO and former Republican Texas state Rep. Jason Isaac told the DCNF. “By supporting proposals that harm American energy producers, UTIMCO’s fund managers are violating their fiduciary responsibility.”

Texas leads the nation in crude oil and natural gas production and in 2023 was responsible for 43% of crude oil output, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. However, AAF found many examples of UTIMCO’s asset managers voting in favor of proposals aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) emissions and other actions to mitigate so-called climate change, which the watchdog alleges comes at the expense of producing value for investors.

For instance, at ExxonMobil’s May 2023 yearly shareholder meeting, Aperio Group voted in support of a proposal to recalculate its GHG emissions to account for the assets it has sold. The resolution asserted that “the economic risks associated with climate change exist in the real world rather than on company balance sheets” and argues that the investments ExxonMobil sells may lower emissions on paper but that they fail to actually help achieve the goal of keeping global temperatures from rising by 1.5 degrees Celsius — which is an objective of the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement — potentially exposing the company and its stakeholders to what it calls “climate risk.”

Some of Aperio Group’s clients have access to customize their individual proxy voting policy, according to BlackRock. BlackRock itself voted against this ExxonMobil proposal on behalf of most of its clients.

AAF’s “report on UTIMCO’s investment practices should alarm every Texan who values our state’s proud oil and gas industry,” Texas Railroad Commissioner Wayne Christian told the DCNF. “It’s outrageous to see Texas university investments being used to support radical ESG agendas, decarbonization, and dangerous policies like Net Zero and the Paris Accord, which threaten our energy independence and economy. We must put an end to the woke political agendas that undermine the very foundation of Texas’ success and ensure our investments align with the values of hard-working Texans.”

Moreover, at defense contractor Raytheon Technologies’ yearly shareholder meeting in May 2023, J.P. Morgan Asset Management backed a proposal urging the company to publish a report on efforts to reduce GHG emissions in alignment with the Paris Climate Agreement.

“Raytheon Technologies creates significant carbon emissions from its value chain and is exposed to numerous climate-related risks,” it states. “Failing to respond to this changing environment may make Raytheon less competitive and have a negative effect on its cost of capital and shareholders’ financial returns.”

Isaac told the DCNF that UTIMCO’s “managers are discriminating against fossil fuel” companies through ESG investing based on the definition of “boycott” in Texas’ Senate Bill 13, which Abbot signed in 2021 and the former representative said he helped create.

The bill defines boycotting energy companies as refusing to engage or ending business with a company involved in fossil fuels “without an ordinary business purpose.” It also specifies actions aimed “to penalize, inflict economic harm on, or limit commercial relations with a company because the company” does business related to fossil fuels and fails to “pledge to meet environmental standards beyond applicable federal and state law.”

Isaac added that the asset managers “should be held accountable and placed on Texas’ list of “financial companies that boycott energy companies,” which mandates Texas public investment entities subject to SB 13 “avoid contracting with, and divest from, these companies unless they can demonstrate this would conflict with their fiduciary duties.”

The S&P Global Clean Energy Index, which includes companies that engage in energy production from renewable sources, has fallen about 7% so far in 2024, while the S&P 500 Energy Index, which features many oil and gas companies, has risen close to 3% in that same time.

Louisianans’ pension funds were similarly leveraged to push climate-related proposals within publicly traded companies, the DCNF reported in April, based on another public records request by AAF.

“UTIMCO’s asset managers’ apparent promotion of leftist objectives, including ESG, is extremely troubling and contrary to Texas law banning boycotts and discrimination against fossil fuels. The legislature must exercise oversight and hold UTIMCO accountable,” Republican Texas state Rep. Brian Harrison told the DCNF. “Governmental bodies, including their proxies, should not pursue objectives that harm the Texas economy and go against our values.”

Cantillon, GQG Partners, Texas A&M and Abbot’s office did not respond to the DCNF’s requests for comment. Aperio Group, Generation Investment Management, JP Morgan Asset Management and the University of Texas declined to comment.

Continue Reading

Trending

X