USA 
United Kingdom
“We will continue to boldly pursue both.”
As the US government calls for a return of ‘merit-based opportunity’ in American businesses through the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, bosses at consulting giant McKinsey are defiant that the two objectives can go hand in hand.
The firm’s Managing Partner Bob Sternfels reiterated a promise to continue prioritizing diversity in a recent memo sent to staff on February 3, first reported by Bloomberg News.
“Some have asked whether we will continue to prioritize diversity in our meritocracy,” he wrote. “The answer is yes.”
McKinsey doubles down on DEI amid Fortune 500 U-turns
McKinsey’s confirmation of its position on DEI comes as a handful of major Fortune 500 firms walk back commitments to previous diversity hiring targets and other inclusion initiatives, including Google, Meta, Amazon, Deloitte US, and Goldman Sachs.
Statements from executives at some firms to end DEI programs in recent months have signalled a belief that diversity targets should be eliminated to create a workplace where people are hired solely based on merit.
Fiona Cicconi, Chief People Officer at Google owner Alphabet Group did not explicitly use the word meritocracy, but wrote in a memo to Googlers that the decision to scrap diversity targets came as the tech firm strives to create a “workplace where we hire the best people wherever we operate.”
Unlike those organizations, McKinsey bosses are insistent that embracing workplace meritocracy does not mean ending diversity measures.
“We will continue to boldly pursue both, because these two things together — our diverse meritocracy — is what makes us distinctive and has defined who we are over our nearly 100 years,” Sternfels asserted in his email.
In recent months, some business executives – including Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and Elon Musk – have advocated for a shift from DEI to ‘MEI’ (merit, excellence, and intelligence), coined in a blog post authored by Alexandr Wang, cofounder and CEO of Scale AI.
“We hire only the best person for the job, we seek out and demand excellence, and we unapologetically prefer people who are very smart,” Wang wrote.
The post drew ire from DEI experts, who agreed with Wang’s assertion that meritocracy and diversity do not conflict with each other, but argued that anti-DEI critics are wrong in their claims that achieving a meritocratic future of work can be achieved without intentional diversity programs.
“I think there’s been a sentiment of late where people have this idea that they want to return to this meritocratic past. The unfortunate part of that, though, is that meritocratic past doesn’t exist,” said Adia Wingfield, Professor of Sociology at Washington University in St. Louis speaking Fortune last year.
‘Restoring merit-based opportunity’ officially US government policy
In his nascent second term in the White House, President Trump has been quick to make the opposition of DEI US government policy, terminating DEI departments and programs across federal agencies.
One of Trump’s directives, titled ‘Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,’ claimed DEI policies in federal government violate civil rights laws. While he did not directly order private firms to end DEI, he urged them to follow his guidance by ending diversity commitments.
Some business leaders to scrap DEI measures in recent months have indicated the shift will help them align with the Trump Administration.
At Meta, for example, CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently spoke on the company’s move to eliminate all DEI measures. “After the last several years, we now have an opportunity to have a productive partnership with the United States government, and we’re going to take that,” he said.
Similarly, Google’s Chief People Officer said that the tech giant’s policy shift was made “to comply with recent court decisions and U.S. Executive Orders.”
A spokesperson for McKinsey indicated the firm is not worried that its pursuit of both diversity and meritocracy will not present legal headaches, however. “We will continue to follow the law in the US and other countries where we operate,” they said.
