Tracey Diamond, Emily Schifter, and Nicole Edmonds discuss the evolving landscape of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace.
Workplace diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs face more scrutiny than ever after President Trump's recent Executive Order targeting DEI policies and programs across the federal government, in private industries that do business with the federal government, and in the private sector generally. In this episode of Hiring to Firing, hosts Emily Schifter and Tracey Diamond discuss the evolving DEI landscape. Joined by their colleague Nicole Edmonds, DEI Committee Chair at Troutman Pepper Locke, they explore the impact of recent Supreme Court decisions on DEI initiatives, the rise of reverse discrimination claims, and practical steps employers can take to foster an inclusive work environment. Tune in for a thoughtful discussion on navigating DEI opportunities and challenges in today's evolving legal landscape.
Troutman Pepper Locke's Labor + Employment Practice Group provides comprehensive thought leadership through various channels. We regularly issue advisories that offer timely insights into the evolving employment law landscape, and maintain the HiringToFiring.Law Blog, a resource spotlighting best practices for employers. Our Hiring to Firing Podcast, hosted by Tracey Diamond and Emily Schifter, delves into pressing labor and employment law topics, drawing unique parallels from pop culture, hit shows, and movies.
Hiring to Firing Podcast — Navigating DEI in a Shifting Legal Landscape: Insights From Late Night
Host: Tracey Diamond and Emily Schifter
Guest: Nicole Edmonds
Recorded: December 12, 2024
Aired: January 28, 2025
[INTRODUCTION]
Tracey Diamond:
 Hi, everybody. Thanks for listening in to Hiring to Firing. Today, we're going to be talking about corporate DEI programs, a very timely topic. But before we get to that, we have an important announcement to make. Troutman Pepper, for those of you who don't know, has now officially merged with Locke Lord to create a new law firm, Troutman Pepper Locke, which has more than 1600 attorneys across 33 offices in the United States and Europe.
We're very excited to be joining with our Locke Lord partners, and we now have increased capabilities throughout the country, to help you with all of your labor and employment as well as other legal needs. Now, in terms of corporate DEI programs, we're going to be getting to much more detail about this within the program itself, but Emily has an important announcement about recent events that impact corporate DEI programs even more.
Emily Schifter:
That's right. Today, we're going to be talking about some of the challenges and opportunities that exist for employers who are trying to increase their DEI efforts. But just a few days ago, President Trump issued a new executive order that we think increases the stakes even more.
His latest order revokes the prior executive order, 11246, and directs federal agencies to combat illegal private sector DEI preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities, and instead to encourage private employers to implement the Trump administration's policy of individual initiative, excellence, and hard work.
Lots that remains to be seen as far as the practical implications of this executive order, but we will be getting into more of the details in our program that follows.
Tracey Diamond:
So listen in for an important discussion about corporate DEI programs.
[EPISODE]
Tracey Diamond:
Welcome to Hiring to Firing the Podcast. I'm Tracey Diamond, and I'm here with my co-host and partner, Emily Schifter. Together, we tackle all employment issues from Hiring to Firing. Today, we welcome our partner, Nicole Edmonds. Nicole focuses her practice on securities and corporate governance, and also serves as DEI Committee Chair here at Troutman Pepper Locke. Welcome, Nicole. We're so glad to have you join us today.
Nicole Edmonds:
Thank you, Tracey and Emily. It's really great to be with you today. I'm really excited about this conversation.
Tracey Diamond:
I always love an opportunity to talk with you, Nicole. Today, talking about this topic is particularly appropriate. Given the state of affairs in the world, it seems like it's been constantly evolving. Before we get there, why don't you tell us a little bit about your legal practice, your background, and your work on the firm's DEI Committee?
Nicole Edmonds:
Sure. Happy to. I've been a corporate partner at the Troutman firm for on and off. Well, I haven't been a partner the whole time, but I've been in and out of the Troutman firm for about 20 years. I have a focus on securities and corporate governance in my practice. I've been practicing for over 20 years, and I have also during that time spent time in the government as a staff member with the Securities and Exchange Commission. I had a six-month stint in the Obama White House, where I was in the Office of Presidential Personnel. I also spent three years in-house at a public utility holding company, where I served as the corporate secretary for the board and led the team responsible for SEC reporting and capital raising for the company.
In my practice today, as it has evolved, I represent US and foreign companies with respect to compliance with SEC regulations and with corporate governance, which is often tied to the listing standards of either the New York Stock Exchange, or the Nasdaq Stock Market. I also have a focus on ESG, environmental, social, and governance matters from both the governance and DEI standpoints.
As you noted, and of particular relevance to this conversation, since late April of 2024, I've been serving as the chair of Troutman's Diversity Equity and Inclusion Committee. Back at that time, the firm did an entire overhaul of the committee, staffing it for the first time with half associates and half partners, which aligns with our evolution as a firm towards an inclusion focus everywhere. Along with those personnel updates, we have been re-imagining the role that the committee can play at the firm. Historically, it's been somewhat advisory in nature. In keeping with our firm's overall DEI strategy, which is to develop a broad-based, robust approach to DEI in just about everything that we do, we're working to evolve from that advisory role to a working committee role.
Our charge is to contribute to the creation and maintenance of an inclusive culture, where all members of the firm feel a sense of belonging. Our goal is to do this by not only offering DEI Committee-sponsored programming and initiatives, but also, by plugging into the good work that's already being done at the firm by partnering with various functional areas, like recruiting, attorney development and practice management to amplify and enhance the efforts of those groups, thereby avoiding silos and adding more hands to make light work.
Emily Schifter:
That's a very robust job description, Nicole, and I know you are quite busy. Before we get into our topic, though, I just have to ask, what was it like to work in the White House and what were your job duties in the personnel? What did you say it was called? The Personnel Department?
Nicole Edmonds:
The Office of Presidential Personnel, and we worked closely with White House Counsel's office, and it was truly a dream job, honestly. I was part of the vetting team. My job was to work as a liaison, the singular liaison between the White House and the FBI and when the president was either directly appointing folks to serve in the government, or had a Senate confirmation appointee that was coming up, my job was to work with the FBI on the background investigations and to discern whether there were any skeletons and any closets that someone might want to know about. It was completely different than what I do on a day-to-day, and it was a singular experience that I look back on with fondness.
Tracey Diamond:
I'll bet. That really segues a little bit on overlapping into Emily and my world in labor and employment.
Nicole Edmonds:
Definitely.
Emily Schifter:
And the super background check.
Tracey Diamond:
Right. Exactly. That's fascinating. Nicole, you have such a fascinating background, and you have such breadth of experience, and depth of experience, and I think the firm is so lucky to have you, both as a practicing attorney and on our DEI committee. It sounds like, you do have two full-time jobs. So, grateful to have you there and here on our podcast.
Nicole Edmonds:
Oh, thank you. Yeah. There's a lot going on.
Tracey Diamond:
Thank you. Well, shifting to our topic for today, so we've talked about DEI basics before on the podcast, but we thought that now would be a good time to revisit the topic as more time has passed since the Supreme Court decisions in students for fair admissions first Harvard and students for fair admissions first UNC, and given some of the changes that we're seeing in the world today, especially with the incoming administration. For those who aren't familiar in those two cases, the Supreme Court held that the use of race as a plus factor in the admissions process for students who were applying to attend those schools was a violation of the Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
While the Supreme Court admissions decisions don't have a direct legal impact on employment laws that govern what employers do or the decisions that they make regarding applicants, or employees in the workplace, or really their DEI efforts, there has definitely been some practical impacts of these decisions and certainly some fallback as employers grappled with what this meant for them.
We also have a new Supreme Court case that was announced this fall, where the court has announced that it's going to review the pleading standard for so-called reverse discrimination claims. We'll talk about that case a little bit more later. Lots going on in this area to cover.
Emily Schifter:
As we always do, we'd like to pull in a movie, or a TV show to illustrate our topic. The movie that we chose for today is the 2019 movie called Late Night, written by Mindy Kaling and starring Kaling and Emma Thompson. Thompson plays Katherine Newbury, a late-night TV show host, whose staff is made up 100% of white male writers. In the face of declining ratings, Katherine flippantly orders her staff to hire a woman writer for the optics of having a woman on staff really for no other reason than that. She doesn't really care who it is. Let's take a listen.
[CLIP 1]
Katherine:
Bradley, I don't hate women.
Bradley:
I don't think you think you hate women.
Katherine:
What does that mean?
Bradley:
I think you might have a problem with women.
Katherine:
I love Mary Tyler Moore. I love Gilda Radner.
Bradley:
They're both dead. I think you have a problem with living female writers on your staff. You never want to renew their contracts.
Katherine:
Well, find me one worth keeping.
Bradley:
Would a gay guy work?
Katherine:
No.
[END OF CLIP]
Emily Schifter:
Enter Mindy Kaling's character, Molly Patel. Molly is ambitious and creative and breeds new life into the show, and she ultimately saves Katherine's job after a TV executive threatens to replace Katherine with a younger male comedian. The movie ends with a scene panning over the writer's room, which is now made up of a diverse staff of writers in terms of both gender and race.
As we previewed, unfortunately, we're seeing a shift in today's climate, where we are seeing companies pulling away from their DEI initiatives and the sorts of efforts that we saw in the movie to try and make the workplace more diverse. Again, even though the Supreme Court's decisions didn't address employer practices directly, do you guys think that the opinion has an impact on employers? What have you seen or in what way?
Nicole Edmonds:
Yes, definitely. I was thinking about this topic and I was casting my mind back to 2020 and thinking about where we've come from to get to this point. I think folks would agree that in the spring of 2020, we were all in our homes and we saw the murder of George Floyd playing out in the media, and there was this reckoning on race that ensued here in the US. There was almost this recognition in our collective conscience that our country does have some major issues around racism, sexism, discrimination, etc.
It seemed at least at the time that we all came to this realization that we wanted to do something to make our country a better place, where everyone felt they were treated fairly and everyone had access to equal opportunity. Then we saw these sentiments bubbling up in corporate America and we saw many, many companies issuing public statements of support for racial justice and support for DEI initiatives. We saw many, many companies hiring chief diversity officers for the first time. I saw a stat saying that the rate of CDO hires in 2021 was triple the rate in the prior 16 months before that. Lots of DEI job openings at the time. I saw another stat that said those listings for DEI roles increased 123% in the months following George Floyd's murder. Quite a time to be working in DEI.
Here at Troutman as well, we had this day of reflection at the firm, and then the firm itself hired a DEI consultancy firm. We wanted to figure out where we were as it stood on matters of diversity, equity inclusion and what we could do to make our ecosystem a place where people felt like they belonged and could be successful. As you noted, so definitely since the summer of 2023 when we saw the SCOTUS decisions come down and maybe even a bit before that, as it always does, right, we're seeing this pendulum swinging back the other direction. Now, those organizations that went headlong into DEI are now retreating somewhat from it, and sometimes in very material fashion, putting out press releases saying, we're doing away with our social and cultural awareness programs, we're eliminating all DEI roles, we're retiring our DEI goals, we're not going to continue to participate in certain campaigns and we're not going to give priority to suppliers, etc. It seems, unfortunately, we're seeing a lot of this trend, at least it's definitely hitting the headlines.
Tracey Diamond:
Why do you think that is, Nicole? Do you think that it's a direct relation to those two Supreme Court opinions? Or do you think that it's just post-pandemic, or the incoming administration? All the above? What do you think is actually the impetus here?
Nicole Edmonds:
Right. I think, definitely the SCOTUS decisions, I can remember when it came down thinking, that's a blow, right? I felt like I was caught a little bit flat-footed by that. I do think there is a reaction from a legal risk perspective that we are seeing. I think that we're seeing a rise in reverse discrimination claims. I'm sure you two are seeing that in the work that you do. There's certainly probably general counsel's offices across companies are saying, let's not get ourselves into hot water here. I also think there's – I feel like, I'm observing companies always trying to contort themselves into whatever they think public sentiment is and the sentiment of their stakeholders, right? It's like, everything always seems to be an over-correction, whichever direction they go in.
I think, they are trying to appease shareholder activists, customers, suppliers. I think what we are seeing, too, goes along with the political climate and the country right now, right? DEI is such an easy target for this notion of like, we are attacking this woke culture that you hear talked about. We're going to get a little bit into this, I think, in our conversations. I think that if I were advising an organization, what I would say is you need to sit down with yourself and determine what are your corporate values? What are the values of your organization? What drives value for your organization? We can talk about this a little bit, but there are studies that show diverse teams do outperform teams that are more homogenous.
There are certainly business reasons and cultural reasons. If folks feel more included in their organization, they perform better, they are more engaged. There are a whole host of compelling reasons to not go in this direction of this complete pullback and driving in the opposite direction.
Emily Schifter:
Tracey, I'm curious, have you seen in your practice clients, or employers who are really doing the pendulum swing, or do you see more who are thinking, let me try more lightly? I've definitely seen a mix of both. Definitely some who really feel they need to blow wherever the wind is taking them, but others taking the approach, Nicole, suggest of taking a more measured perspective on what are our goals and let's not react too quickly. What are you seeing?
Tracey Diamond:
What I'm seeing in the news is more splashy, larger campaign companies that are pulling away in a public way, which is frankly, in my opinion, disheartening. What I'm seeing in terms of my client base is potentially, maybe quieter and quietly doing away with a budget line for DEI initiatives, or moving the money in a different direction. I think DEI is a very broad umbrella. At the end of the day for a company, a private employer is going to be about dollars and cents. I do see companies that are taking a look at that in terms of, we don't want a litigation, so we're going to maybe move away from certain DEI initiatives that are maybe more risky and use those same dollars in the more inclusion and belonging piece of that puzzle and put the dollars towards programs that make all employees feel included and motivated to be at work, which I don't necessarily think is a bad thing. I think that having all employees of all races, genders, protected categories, etc., feel happy and motivated and included at work is really, ultimately a very worthy goal.
Let's bring it back to the movie a little bit. Emily, I'm going to flip with you. In the movie, Katherine makes it clear that she wants to add a female writer to her team solely for diversity reasons, as we heard in that last clip. When evaluating DEI practices, what considerations should employers take into account and are there certain practices that create more risk than others? I mean, I alluded to that a minute ago, but let's get into it a little bit more. To my point earlier, DEI is a fairly broad umbrella. What do you see as the higher risk DEI initiatives and what maybe would be the less risky ways to spend those dollars?
Emily Schifter:
Right. I think you hit it on the head, Tracey. But if we think of risk as a continuum, on the more risky side, you're going to see things like, set asides and quotas, where you're like, I would think about it in terms of exclusion. If you're running a program specifically for a certain group of folks and you're excluding others, that's going to leave you a bit more open to risk, litigation risk, or maybe reputational risk.
Tracey Diamond:
Or if you're looking up quotas, let's say, you're putting in quotas in place where we must hire X number of diverse employees, that is probably a risky proposition in today's climate.
Emily Schifter:
Exactly. I think you even have to be careful about using certain proxies for protected attributes, like geography, or income level. I think if you want to get on the less risky side of the continuum, you're going to be engaging in programming and initiatives, to your point, Tracey, that really are focusing on the inclusion and belonging piece. I'll give you an example from Troutman, right? Just this past summer, we have summer interns that we bring in, we call them summer associates.
Our black affinity group wanted to put on a program that featured our black women partners, and coming in and talking to the summer associates. I think historically, we might have only done that for the black women summer associates. In this instance, again, trying to keep our programming within the guardrails, we opened the program to everyone. What I found interesting about it is we did have summer associates show up for that programming who clearly didn't identify as black women. But I thought, this is actually really useful for folks from a different background to come and hear the experiences of what it's like to be a black woman in big law, right? It actually felt this win-win at the end of the day. Everybody got an opportunity to take something from that conversation.
Tracey Diamond:
Absolutely. Otherwise, folks who are in whatever protected category we're talking about, they're just talking to themselves, right? Having folks from different backgrounds attend those events, in my opinion, is really important in order to educate and get the message out.
Nicole Edmonds:
I agree.
Emily Schifter:
Yeah, important for everybody. Certainly, I love the idea of the continuum and looking at things to foster inclusion more generally. I think having events where everyone can go and learn from each other is certainly on the low risk and so beneficial, sounds like, even at Troutman.
Emily Schifter:
I think too, just continuing on this theme, if you want to continue thinking about ways that you can continue to advance DEI efforts, other things that are going to be on the less risky side would be any efforts directed at eliminating bias, for example, in your hiring practices, right? You can have inclusive trainings we put on with our DEI team here, inclusive leadership trainings, inclusive culture training, allyship training. We offer all of those not only internally, but externally as well. You can create structured interview programs, you can anonymize resume reviews. There are lots of ways to get at this work that do not end up excluding people, or putting you on the super risky side of the continuum.
Tracey Diamond:
For those who don't know what it is, Nicole, what is a structured interview program?
Nicole Edmonds:
A structured interview is where, if we are, for example, going to go onto a law school's campus using a law firm as an example, and we're going to interview first-year associates for our summer program. We are going to ask our interviewers all to use the same questions with each interviewee that we see. What we're trying to avoid with that approach is you don't want Nicole to show up at someone's campus and think, "Oh, wow. I really have a lot in common with this person. They're from Virginia Beach. Well, I'm from Virginia Beach." And all of a sudden, I get this warm, fuzzy feeling and I just say, "Well, I just really like her." This structured interview process is going to give you a framework for really assessing individuals on an agreed set of criteria that we set before we go into these interviews and it's not left up to just sort of, how do you feel about the person?
Tracey Diamond:
That makes sense and probably gets you much more useful information to determine who would be the best fit for that position. The I in DEI, inclusivity, is really important, so that all employees feel heard and employees in a protected category don't feel they are the "diversity hire." Let's play our next clip where Mindy Kaling's character talks about that very thing.
[CLIP 2]
Katherine:
That was the first year we won the Emmy. It's good stuff back then.
Molly:
Oh, that must be Tom's dad. I mean, Seven's dad. Must be nice to inherit a job from your father.
Katherine:
You know, he's not terrible just because he's privileged. If he's very worst qualities are elitism and snobbery, that's not really all that bad, is it?
Molly:
Yeah. Well, he thinks I'm a diversity hire.
Katherine:
You are a diversity hire. What? You think no one ever accused me of sleeping my way to the top? I mean, the point is you're here. If you want people to see you as something other than a diversity hire, you have to make them. It's not fair, but it never is for women.
[END OF CLIP]
Tracey Diamond:
We've talked about how making a diversity hire, not only can make your employees feel excluded and unmotivated, but it also can create legal risk. Other than structured interviews, is there other tools that companies have to avoid this diversity hire concern?
Nicole Edmonds:
Well, first, don't make diversity hires. Let's not do that. Let's continue to focus on the inclusion strategies that we discussed. I think, taking it to how we approach things at Troutman, what we try to do is we try to embed DEI and in particular, the inclusion focus into everything that we do at the firm. What we have established here at the firm is what we call a DEI matrix of leadership. DEI is not something that's just sitting in a department somewhere that someone's team takes care of. I think you all spoke with Erin Cannon on this podcast previously. These are fabulous Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
It is not Erin's job to infuse inclusion into our day-to-day lives here at the firm. She is here to guide us. But what we have established with Erin's leadership is this matrix where we've got about 150 people engaged across the firm, who are in one form or another, engaging with a DEI lens on all that they do.
To me, inclusion is as simple as if I'm having a conversation about who we might be putting up for an award, right? It's saying to my colleagues as we're talking about it, who might not be on this list? Who might we be missing, right? It's conversations like that, so that you can make it as our managing partner, Amy Colby says, muscle memory, that we're thinking about inclusion. We're always thinking about whose voice is not in the room. We're always thinking about how do we create an environment and a culture that is inclusive. It's almost not even so much about the programs. It's about the psyche of the organization and the culture to me.
Emily Schifter:
I think that's so true. I remember one thing the DEI partner in our section did was just send an email in advance of certain holidays. I know Ramadan and Rosh Hashanah, things that we maybe aren't always top of mind for those who don't celebrate them, but so incredibly helpful for everyone to be made aware of. I think simple things like that, where it's just making it that muscle memory of, oh, that's right. Let's make sure we don't disturb somebody who's celebrating is so helpful to have.
Tracey Diamond:
Agree. On this note, our third clip from the movie Late Night is another example of the consequences of Molly and Mindy Kaling's character feeling excluded.
[CLIP 3]
Molly:
I don't know. Maybe I should just move back to Pennsylvania.
Burditt:
Can I give you some advice? You need to shut the fuck up.
Molly:
Excuse me?
Burditt:
If you hear something you don't agree with, you have to resist the urge to give your opinion.
Molly:
I will not be marginalized by the iron fist of white privilege that pervades this work environment.
Burditt:
I am not trying to silence your strong female, Indian woman of color spirit, #MeToo, TransIsBeautiful, blah, blah, blah. You're still a new writer with no experience. You need to stop giving advice and write something. You're a writer, so write.
Molly:
Okay.
[END OF CLIP]
Tracey Diamond:
Here, feeling like an outsider has left Kaling's character feeling unsupported. As this clip illustrates, this isn't just a legal risk issue, it also creates problems with work performance and also, satisfaction, too. Lots of real good business reasons to avoid exclusivity amongst your entire workforce.
Emily Schifter:
Switching gears, we talked a little bit about reverse discrimination cases and how there's been at least a little bit of a trend of seeing more of those claims being brought. What we mean when we say reverse discrimination is where someone from a typically majority group brings a claim that they were discriminated against in favor of someone from a typically minority group. The Supreme Court just this fall announced that it's going to hear a case to resolve a circuit split relating to the pleading standard that has to be met for these sorts of claims.
Currently, five of the Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal hold that majority plaintiffs who are bringing a discrimination claim need to show background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant employer is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority, which is a bit of a higher burden than the traditional discrimination Title VII case. If the Supreme Court invalidates that background circumstances role, plaintiffs in those five circuits and everywhere in the country will have an easier path to proving reverse discrimination under Title VII than they currently do. How do you guys think this ruling might impact employers' DEI efforts?
Nicole Edmonds:
You're going to take this one, right, Tracey?
Tracey Diamond:
Sure. I think it's going to make it that much harder for employers to want to focus on efforts where they're choosing a minority candidate, let's say, over a majority candidate, because of concerns about a lawsuit, whether you think that's right or wrong, I think that's the truth is that at the end of the day, the influx of reverse discrimination claims, which I do think will be an influx in the courts if the pleading standard is lowered, will make it that much harder for DEI efforts beyond the belonging and inclusivity piece of the equation. What do you guys think?
Nicole Edmonds:
I definitely think it opens the door to make it easier for somebody who feels aggrieved that they were not selected for promotion, or for a position that they wanted to try and bring a claim, with at least a straight face and we certainly see that a lot in our world where people want to tie a decision that they don't like to a protected characteristic. I think having a lower pleading standard might embolden people and traditionally, majority groups potentially. Of course, they're still a burden of proof, so it's not open season and they're still going to have to establish their claim and go through the whole litigation process. My hope is that it might be an influx, but not an overwhelming influx.
Emily Schifter:
Yeah, the problem practically speaking is that oftentimes, these cases are taken on a contingency fee basis and anybody can sue. I mean, this is true on both sides of the equation of any type of discrimination case and it's why frankly, discrimination cases already are clogging up the courts. On the employer side, usually it's not a contingency type fee and it's something that employers are paying often by the hour, although there is insurance oftentimes that will cover these types of litigation, it's just increased costs. It's a cost of doing business that may increase in light of if it turns out that it's easier to plead a reverse discrimination case than it is currently. I guess, we'll wait and see.
Nicole Edmonds:
I do have something on that. The one thing I think about with respect to this conversation is that I sit here as a black woman, and in C suites and higher levels, executive levels, there are so few folks from underrepresented backgrounds already in those rooms, boardrooms, etc. Just my concern from a personal standpoint is here we are again facing these circumstances where we are going to have to feel like we've not only got to be commensurate with our peers, but we're going to have to bring so much more in terms of education and experience and pedigree to not be questioned and to not have that hiring decision-maker question about why you chose this person from a protected class, versus the cisgender white guy. That's disheartening.
Tracey Diamond:
Absolutely. Cause I think what we would advise employers in the light of this, just as we would for any discrimination claim is we'll just make sure that you can document your legitimate non-discriminatory reason for the selection. You're absolutely right. When you've got this lowered bar, potentially for a reverse discrimination claim and players are going to have to pull together every bit of evidence that they can. I think that does create some challenges.
Emily Schifter:
Well, it remains to be seen what happens, but maybe at the end of the day, it forces employers to well document and really give careful thought to their legitimate business reasons for choosing whoever they choose over the other person. It becomes more a matter of course, too many employers forget to do that, or make their decisions quickly and don't bother to document their rationale, or think, "Oh, well, all my employees are at will, so why do I have to do that?" This would be just yet another reason why employers should be giving careful thought and looking at skill sets and being able to justify whoever it is that they ultimately choose for whatever position they're looking at.
Tracey Diamond:
Absolutely. Nicole, in light of all the benefits and the risks that we've discussed today, what are some steps employers, or organizations can take to evaluate, create, and execute on their DEI programs?
Nicole Edmonds:
This is where I think this gets fun. I would just start with exactly what Troutman did going back four years ago, which is, let's level set and start with an assessment. You're sitting in your organization, you're not sure what to do about what you're hearing in the news, about all of these challenges, etc. Start with an assessment. Where are you? What programs and policies and initiatives do you have in place? Do that with a risk assessment embedded in it. You call Emily, you call Tracey, you call me to help you figure out what things are you doing that are going to expose you to more risk, what things are you doing that are more on the less risky side, right? This can look like hiring a consultancy to help you. This can look like focus groups, surveys, interviews, big information gathering process. That to me is step one.
Once you've got all that information and you take it in and you've assessed and figured out, again, what are the values of your organization? If your goal is to try to continue to do this work, come up with a plan. Consider where your gaps are in what you have. For Troutman, for example, our gap was we just had a prevalence of belonging uncertainty at the firm. We knew that was the key issue that we wanted to address. Then think about what programs, actions, initiatives you can implement to take you from your current state to your desired state. Again, you want to do this in connection with DEI professionals, labor and employment lawyers to make sure that you are doing this in a de-risked way.
Then, make sure when you go to execute on the plan, again, you're always tying this to your business objectives, business values, your outcome, your overall corporate strategy. Do not have DEI sitting over on the side, as we talked about earlier. Have it embedded within your organization. I really do think we've got a clever approach here at the Troutman firm, where we've got leaders across the firm who are engaged in this work and thinking about this work. Again, I would refocus again on this inclusion and belonging aspect. It's not about quotas, it's not about targets, it's about creating an inclusive environment where everyone feels they can be themselves and that they belong. I think taking that road may be the longer road in – Yes, it's easy to fill a quota. Yes, it's easy to have a target, right? But it's a little bit harder to grow a diverse workforce in a more organic way. But I think it would be more long lasting if people come in and they feel like this is a place where they belong.
Tracey Diamond:
Well, Nicole, thank you so much. You've given us some really great food for thought and I think this was a really interesting and I think, hopefully, helpful conversation for our listeners as well. Thank you so much again for joining us and thanks, as always, to our listeners for tuning in.
Nicole Edmonds:
Thank you so much to both of you. I enjoyed it.
Copyright, Troutman Pepper Locke LLP. These recorded materials are designed for educational purposes only. This podcast is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are solely those of the individual participants. Troutman does not make any representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the contents of this podcast. Information on previous case results does not guarantee a similar future result. Users of this podcast may save and use the podcast only for personal or other non-commercial, educational purposes. No other use, including, without limitation, reproduction, retransmission or editing of this podcast may be made without the prior written permission of Troutman Pepper Locke. If you have any questions, please contact us at troutman.com.