From intention to action: Bridging the gap

At CFO India’s recent CFO100 conference in Mumbai, a provocative session dissected one of corporate governance’s most polarising themes: the journey from espousing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to embedding it meaningfully into business strategy. Against a backdrop of global backlash—exemplified by retreats from DEI commitments in the U.S. post-Trump—the debate revealed both the fragility of progress and the stubborn optimism of those championing systemic change.

We were joined by three industry stalwarts, Debasis Nandy, President & Group CFO, Thomas Cook India; Milind Shripad Sarwate, Founder & CEO, Increate; Former CFO & CHRO, Marico India; and Dr. Sujaya Banerjee, CEO, Capstone People Consulting. The discussion was expertly moderated by our Managing Director, Ms. Anuradha Das Mathur. 

The backlash paradox

The session opened with a stark question: Are recent corporate rollbacks on DEI merely a reactionary “media slugfest” or a harbinger of deeper regression? Debasis framed DEI as a long-term voyage akin to ESG (environmental, social, governance) imperatives. “Storms will come, but the ship must sail,” he argued, suggesting that companies abandoning DEI would soon rediscover its value—not as charity, but as a catalyst for resilience and innovation.

Yet Sujaya countered that DEI’s stumbles stem from flawed execution. “When did DEI become a formula for mediocrity?” she asked, critiquing initiatives that prioritise quotas over capability. Her example of a conglomerate revamping its audit team—replacing cookie-cutter chartered accountants with a mix of commerce graduates, engineers, and even CA Intermediates—underscored her point. The result? Retention soared, proving diversity’s strategic worth.

The woke overreach

Milind pinpointed DEI’s reputational crisis: overzealousness. “Complexity alienates,” he noted, referencing the escalating acronyms of LGBTQ+ rights and the backlash to “28 genders.” He likened DEI extremism to religious fanaticism—well-intentioned but counterproductive. His solution? Anchor DEI in business logic. Consumer-facing firms, for instance, benefit from gender-diverse boards not merely to tick boxes but to mirror their customer base.

Anuradha challenged the panel’s pragmatism. Must every moral choice be justified by profit? Citing the Tata Group’s legacy of ethical decisions that later proved profitable, she argued that corporate citizenship demands occasional leaps of faith. “Without legal mandates, when would social change occur?” she asked, referencing Madhya Pradesh’s initial panchayat reservations, where initial tokenism gave way to genuine female empowerment.

The execution trap

The discussion pivoted to pitfalls. Sujaya recounted a late-night Subway delivery fiasco: a disabled rider, laudably hired by a food delivery company, couldn’t navigate her apartment complex, forcing her to collect her order at the gate. “This is why DEI frustrates,” she sighed. “Poor execution makes others pay for your goodwill.” Her cautionary tale highlighted a universal truth: DEI cannot thrive as a “decoration on a Christmas tree.”

The path forward

Consensus emerged on three fronts:

1. Literacy: DEI must be understood as strategic, not sentimental. Leaders should tailor initiatives to their societal context—addressing caste in India, for instance, rather than importing Western templates.
2. Leadership: Tokenism fails when mandates lack buy-in from the top. DEI belongs in boardrooms, not HR silos.
3. Patience: Social change is incremental. Quotas and laws, however imperfect, lay groundwork.

As the session closed, Sujaya struck an optimistic chord: “Good talent cannot hide.” Her anecdote of a rising female executive poised for CEO candidacy embodied DEI’s quiet victories. The road from intention to action remains fraught, but as Milind conceded, “Evolved organizations recognise diversity’s dividends—if they have the courage to rethink what ‘best’ looks like.”

In the end, the panel’s tension—between idealism and pragmatism—mirrored a broader corporate reckoning. DEI’s future may hinge on bridging that divide, one nuanced policy at a time.