Do we need to professionalise the D&I industry?

Do we need to professionalise the D&I industry?

By Jo Faragher on 24 July 2025

There’s no denying that corporate diversity teams and their policies are under fire from certain circles. D&I professionals working for multinational companies in particular have come under pressure in recent months to – in the worst cases – put the brakes on what they do, or at least rebadge or rejustify investment in inclusion. Some big brands have publicly denounced DEI, saying they are scrapping targets and focusing on other things.

While it’s undoubtedly been a stressful time for people working in the industry, is it possible that corporations perhaps do not understand the true value of D&I because it’s not always clear? Unlike HR, the profession does not have a recognised or accredited career path, so it could be easy for detractors to claim that D&I leaders lack credibility, even if this is not the case. Mo Kanjilal, founder and director of Edge of Difference, argues that D&I responsibilities often span roles, but that there needs to be “more structure, defined roles and frameworks to show people the career paths”.

She adds: “In current times when these roles are under threat and often under-funded, creating frameworks and accreditation would help to validate the need for such crucial roles in organisations. What we do need to be careful about is how these frameworks are created. If they are too complex and costly that will make the work even harder to prioritise in organisations.” Professionalising D&I would also bring in more perspectives and ideas, she argues, enabling independent consultants operating in the sector to clearly indicate their areas of expertise.

Be specific

Valerie Zolezzi-Wyndham, a leadership and culture consultant, says it’s not so much about formal career paths, “as much as we need to be specific about the work we do. There are many types of DEI work, we need to be clear about our specific expertise and where we partner with others,” she explains. A failure to be specific about what D&I policies and teams can achieve can put the function at risk, agrees Abby Grozenski, founder of Woven Talent. She says: “DEI is proven to be good for business and the bottom line, but DEI often falls under HR which is an overhead cost, making them more susceptible to redundancies and layoffs as company policies change and evolve. DEI should instead be recognised as a business function tied to profitability, productivity of teams and tenure of high performers.”

According to the d&i Leaders global benchmarking report earlier this year, professionals who had a formal development plan tended to show better wellbeing and a greater sense of empowerment, yet less than half (47%) have one in place. Could D&I professionals push for more career development from senior teams if there was a more formal accreditation framework in place? Equally, could a requirement for formal qualifications enable CEOs or chief people officers to interrogate D&I teams’ experience more deeply than they do now?

Evidence-led profession

Dr Meenakshi Krishnan, head of DEI research consulting and principal research fellow at the Institute for Employment Studies, says not necessarily. “Professionalising D&I with certifications and strict standards may sound attractive in terms of bringing rigour, expertise, and evidence-based approaches into the function, but runs the risk of excluding passionate champions who come from lived experience and a social justice lens,” she explains.

“It also risks overly commodifying and commercialising a role that needs to be responsive to the unique internal needs of the organisation rather than deploying ready-made solutions or ‘best practice’ learnt from elsewhere. Another risk is it can lead to restricting D&I actions to a few ‘experts’ rather than making it the responsibility of all leaders in the organisation.” Instead, an option would be to develop voluntary standards and ethical guidelines, along with strengthening knowledge among D&I practitioners, particularly in the use of robust evidence-led and research-backed approaches to D&I interventions.

Smaranda Boros, Professor of Intercultural Management and Organisational Behaviour at Vlerick Business School in Belgium shares Dr Krishnan’s views about being evidence-led, claiming that D&I needs to “massively catch up with research in the field”. “There is now a significant body of evidence that needs to be integrated into DEI approaches – and not all of it is sexy or sells as well as some of the things practiced today,” she says. “Second, we are in a new wave of DEI practice, where it needs to be seen as part of a company’s strategy and where actions are clearly integrated with who the company is, where it goes, which context it operates in, and its day-to-day realities.”

Professor Boros argues that any certification would have to challenge companies to prove that they offered well-integrated DEI policies, rather than offer “window dressing”. She adds: “This is a problem with many certifications that exist already – number-based reporting often moves the focus towards those actions and those KPIs that are easier to quantify or to show fast change around, rather than focusing on substantive change (which is not linear, nor does it show immediate positive results).“

Effective or siloed?

Andy Lane, founder of communications consultancy Ideas! Words” Actions= says: “Maybe the most important question is, what do UK workers need the most: an effective DEI industry or effective DEI practices across all industries? If more diverse, equitable and inclusive workplaces are the end goal, then DEI-focused practices need to be present in every business decision, every board meeting and every management plan.” Lane argues that some firms face a “cost-of-inclusion crisis”, where adopting policy protections feels like a challenge.

He adds: “If DEI becomes a siloed industry or a side-project for the human resources department, it will have a bigger mountain to climb and greater risk of falling short of the summit.” Professionalising DEI will only help if this is paired with a “recalibration of business practices” so companies are inclusive by default, he argues: “A professionalised silo that sits at arm’s length from business decisions will always struggle to answer the core brief of creating more inclusive workplaces.”

A veteran of D&I with more than 25 years’ experience, cultural strategist Geoffrey Williams thinks the path to achieving inclusion and belonging is complex, and this means the career framework is too. “It requires more than passion, it demands strategic insight, cultural intelligence, and a deep understanding of organisational systems. This is where accreditation could play a vital role: not as a gatekeeper, but as a framework for clarity and consistency,” he says.

HR background

Williams came up to senior roles in D&I through commercial business and HR roles, so understands the mechanisms that drive organisational change. “This background has given me a strong foundation in people strategy, which is essential for DE&I work to have lasting impact. I’ve seen firsthand how those who excel in this space often have HR experience; they understand the levers of influence, the importance of data, and the nuances of employee experience,” he adds. He believes that accreditation would be a positive move, or at least a “shared understanding” of what different roles should entail.

Williams explains: “But for accreditation to have real value, it must be aligned with the realities of the work. It should reflect the intersection of DE&I with business strategy, culture, and employee engagement. It should recognise that this work is not just about events or awareness campaigns it’s about shifting mindsets, policies, and systems. And it should be flexible enough to honor the diverse paths people take into this profession, whether through HR, social justice, organisational development, or lived experience. Accreditation won’t solve every challenge in the DE&I space. But it could be a powerful step toward professionalising the field, elevating its credibility, and ensuring that those doing this critical work are equipped – and recognised, for the impact they make.”