Description
All the details for assignment should be in the attached document. The Company I have chosen is Shell PLC. You should be arguing the pro side of the debate. The attached document titled “mod 9 debate prep..” has some sources that might be helpful in answering the question but do not necessary need to be used. Outside sources are also ok as long as they are also cited APA style.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Your boss has just approached you and asked you to write a briefing memo to help
him/her decide how your firm might respond to increasing expectations from
customers, policy-makers, suppliers, community and employees to be more
inclusive and to address inequality through your firm’s policies and practices.
The “G” is in the mix because part of what companies are grappling with includes not
only fiduciary governance, but also multi-stakeholder consultative processes. Who
should inform decisions regarding commitments to social impacts? Executives only,
communities we are trying to serve? employees? Which employees? Your job is to
make a recommendation based on what you see in your research about how your firm
should respond.
DO NOT PUT YOUR NAME ON YOUR MEMO
Your memo should address the following:
What: What are the emerging trends and practices to which you might be required or
expected to respond.
So what: Is this important for us to address/prepare for right now? If so, why? Where
might we be caught flat-footed if we don’t adopt your recommendation? Is there a place
where we might secure an opportunity or advantage if we adopt your recommendation?
Now what: What could we do? What is your recommendation? What are the
arguments for undertaking this effort? What are the arguments against? What are the
consequences of each path? What is your recommendation on balance?
What does this mean for us: Do we need to do anything differently? How might we
need to deploy resources differently? What additional resources might we need? Do
we need to change processes to be able to execute?
This must be submitted ON TIME. You get no bonus for length. This memo should not
be more than a couple of pages long. Your boss wants the facts and s/he wants them
supported by empirical evidence from reputable sources. Cite your evidence APA style
with permalinks or DOIs and pull it from peer reviewed journals or primary sources.
Content delivery: 25 to >20.0 pts
Provides rich and full presentation of information in an appropriate memo format. Audience for memo is
defined. Demonstrates subject matter knowledge and business acumen. Leads reader to a clear
conclusion. Includes all material facts; excludes extraneous facts and conclusions. Includes facts
supporting counterargument. Organized logically.
Organization 25 to >20.0 pts
Information is organized in a fully effective manner; presents strong introduction, expressive body, and
purposeful and persuasive conclusion.
Writing 25 to >20.0 pts
Sentences effectively constructed with no grammatical errors Spelling, capitalization and punctuation
error‐free
Empirical Support 25 to >20.0 pts
Relevant citation to support arguments with empirical peer-reviewed sources or primary data. 5 or more
citations.
PROMPT
Society is sending a clear message about companies creating more equity. We need to use
ALL of the levers available to us to correct institutional racism. Corporate policies and practices
are among the levers. Places like France and Germany have it right.
Group 2 will debate the “pro” side of this argument.
Group 1 will debate the “con” side of this argument.
Triangle Notes:
1. Inequality is wrong; equity is right
a. Disproportionate impact
i.
“people of color are more likely to live in poverty, suffer the impacts of
climate change, experience hunger, die in childbirth, earn less, have
unequal access to education, and be physically and economically
impacted by COVID-19”
2. Business should lead – we have the responsibility to utilize every lever and
business is a primary avenue to do so
a. Businesses have a responsibility to their stakeholders
b. Psychological impacts carry over into the workplace
i.
Employees cannot escape the psychological impacts of institutional
racism which in turn affects the entire workplace.
ii.
Theresa: A recent National Institutes of Health Study found that African
Americans were more likely than other racial/ethnic employees to report
frequent and multiple types of discrimination exposure. The most
consistently described negative mental health consequence of workplace
discrimination is that of increased depressive symptomology. (Hammond
et. al. 2010). doi: 10.1007/s12552-010-9024-0
iii.
Reducing social inequalities – Corporations play a massive role in
society. By addressing systemic racism, companies can contribute to
reducing broader social inequalities.
3. Equality is better for businesses and economies – It is socially and economically
beneficial when there is equity amongst all citizens
a. More equity means a stronger economy
i.
“For instance, the wealth gap between American whites and Blacks is
projected to cost the US economy between $1 trillion and $1.5 trillion in
lost consumption and investment between 2019 and 2028. This translates
to a projected GDP penalty of 4 to 6 percent in 2028 (Noel and others
2019).”
ii.
Casey: World Economic Forum: Studies show the economic benefits of
ethnically diverse workplaces including an increase in multifaceted skills
and experiences, better understanding of customer needs, and more
creativity for problem solving. In contrast, racial inequity creates barriers
to productivity, creativity, and innovation. Between 2016 – 2021,
companies in the US lost $172b due to employee turnover from
inequitable work conditions. Studies in the UK found that fair racial
representation in the labor market could lead to an estimated 24 billion
pounds of annual economic growth. Similarly, the W.K. Kellogg
foundation estimated that the US economy would stand to gain $8 trillion
by 2050 simply by closing the racial equity gap. However, there is
significant risk posed to businesses and economies from a lack of
awareness of the issues posed by racial inequity. A study showed that
49% of black HR professionals believe that racial inequity exists in the
workplace while just 13% of non-black HR professionals hold the same
belief. The US Chamber of Commerce has offered data that highlights the
incentive companies would face by acknowledging these issues and
taking action. Research has shown there is a strong correlation between
diversity in leadership and quarterly earnings. For every 10% increase in
racial and ethnic diversity in executive leadership, EBIT rises by nearly
1%. Also, companies in the top quartile for executive diversity are 33%
more likely to have industry-leading profitability. .
b. Equality and inclusivity increase innovation and productivity – companies
with diverse workforces outperform their less diverse counterparts
c. Long-term financial sustainability – Companies that overlook systemic racism
may face backlash from society, leading to a negative impact on their financial
performance in the long run. On the other hand, companies that proactively
address and target institutional racism often enjoy long-term financial
sustainability.
d. Talent acquisition and retention – Fostering an inclusive corporate culture
draws talent from diverse backgrounds. This helps the companies to build a
talented work pool and retain top-performing employees. In turn, this could add to
the company’s competitive advantage in the industry.
Question: will the other team take the stance that government should lead the charge
instead of businesses? I thought they would argue that addressing inequity was a
mistake, but could they focus simply on the specific lever they think is most
appropriate?
– Perhaps they’ll take the stance that any policies based on race are wrong and
advocate for pure race-neutrality?
– Equality is different than equity
– Equality = giving everyone the same resources and opportunities for
success but failing to recognize that some people have a head start and
some have giant obstacles in their way
– Equity = recognizing that people come from different circumstances with
different obstacles and gives each person the resources and opportunities
they need to reach an equal outcome
Articles to help get us started:
https://fortune.com/2020/09/21/change-the-world-companies-must-tackle-racism/
https://hbr.org/2020/06/u-s-businesses-must-take-meaningful-action-against-racism
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2020/09/the-economic-cost-of-racism-losavio
DEBATE STRUCTURE
1. Open (7 min)
– MC (Dan roughly 1 minute 15 seconds): Good evening everyone. I want to start our
discussion tonight as we have before, with a quote. The late great Dr Martin Luther King
Jr said “We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn’t matter with me now
because I’ve been to the mountaintop… I’ve looked over and I’ve seen the promised
land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight that we as a people will
get to the promised land.” It has been over 60 years since Dr. King’s “I have a dream
speech” and we stand before you today in a fractured society, torn between progress
and regression. We..have come here today… to find a path forward. We come here
today to assert that it is Our responsibility to fight inequalities with equity, that it is in the
hands of businesses to drive progress and that.. This movement is in the best interest of
organizations, economies and nations. Our goal today is to not create further divide
amongst an already fractured society, but to align on a strategy to ensure all people
have the opportunity to grow and all people may prosper. With that, Maddy:
– Opener 1 (Maddy): Inequality is wrong; equity (NOT equality) is right
– Institutional racism still permeates so many aspects of modern society. People
of color are more likely to live in poverty, suffer the impacts of climate change,
experience hunger, die in childbirth, earn less, and have unequal access to
education (source).
– And take health outcomes, as another example. Several studies identify racism
as a root cause of racial health inequities.
– Research on pain management shows that false provider beliefs about
biological differences between blacks and whites are associated with
racial bias in treatment recommendations (source), such that African
Americans are more likely to receive inferior or inadequate care (source).
– Communities of color are far more likely to live in areas with heavy
pollution (source). And even though housing discrimination practices
were technically outlawed decades ago, contemporary studies are still
showing that living in historically redlined districts is associated with
increased risk of multiple serious adverse health outcomes (source),
–
–
including but not limited to cardiovascular disease (here), asthma
(source), and obesity (source and source).
The Supreme Court’s recent ruling striking down affirmative action was based on
the concept of race neutrality; that “eliminating racial discrimination means
eliminating all of it.” However, we argue that this is a deeply flawed position.
– Race-neutral policies are harmful for achieving true racial equity and
justice because they fail to reverse the gaps and barriers that exist
because of structural racism.
– Instead, we must acknowledge and tackle the barriers posed by systemic
racism with race-conscious policies that target the intersection of race,
class, and gender. Only race-conscious policies can dismantle the
structural barriers to prosperity, safety, and equity for marginalized
Americans. (source)
Opener 2: Business should lead – we have the responsibility to utilize every lever
and business is a primary avenue to do so
– Emma
– Businesses have been a key creator of opportunity and value but they have also
played a role in entrenching the inequality we face today. Therefore they have a
fundamental role in reducing it.
– Under a model of capitalism that seeks to maximize shareholder returns, certain
business models and practices have contributed to growing inequality, and
widening social and economic gaps. These include practices in the workplace
such as paying low wages trimming benefits, discouraging workers from
organizing and using data in harmful ways. Other examples include putting
pressure on suppliers, lobbying and avoiding or minimizing tax payments.
“Inequality has serious consequences for social stability, economic progress, and
business’ license to operate, innovate and grow. Corporates have a unique
opportunity to fashion innovative business models that enable systems
transformation to tackle inequality.”
– The rationale for tackling equity goes beyond short-term financial gain. It is much
more fundamental in its roots and is about mitigating systemic risk and building a
world of opportunity in which businesses can thrive long-term.
– Tackling inequality can strengthen business outcomes and can be a long-term
driver of sustainable economic growth by building trust, enhancing social and
political stability, and containing crises.
– We have already seen that there is a shift in the way that business performance
is being measured. Reducing inequality can benefit a business by attracting and
retaining talent, winning consumers, building resilient supply chains, and staying
ahead of regulatory change.
Opener 3: Equity is better for businesses and economies – It is socially and
economically beneficial when there is equity amongst all citizens
– Casey:World Economic Forum: Studies show the economic benefits of ethnically
diverse workplaces including an increase in multifaceted skills and experiences,
better understanding of customer needs, and more creativity for problem solving.
In contrast, racial inequity creates barriers to productivity, creativity, and
innovation. Between 2016 – 2021, companies in the US lost $172b due to
employee turnover from inequitable work conditions. Studies in the UK found that
fair racial representation in the labor market could lead to an estimated 24 billion
pounds of annual economic growth. Similarly, the W.K. Kellogg foundation
estimated that the US economy would stand to gain $8 trillion by 2050 simply by
closing the racial equity gap. However, there is significant risk posed to
businesses and economies from a lack of awareness of the issues posed by
racial inequity. A study showed that 49% of black HR professionals believe that
racial inequity exists in the workplace while just 13% of non-black HR
professionals hold the same belief. The US Chamber of Commerce has offered
data that highlights the incentive companies would face by acknowledging these
issues and taking action. Research has shown there is a strong correlation
between diversity in leadership and quarterly earnings. For every 10% increase
in racial and ethnic diversity in executive leadership, EBIT rises by nearly 1%.
Also, companies in the top quartile for executive diversity are 33% more likely to
have industry-leading profitability.
–
–
– Interrogation strategy
Here are three potential points they may try to raise for the ‘con’ argument:
●
Cultural and Legal Differences: France and Germany, like many European countries,
have different historical, legal, and cultural contexts when it comes to addressing issues
of diversity and equity compared to countries like the United States. What works in one
country may not be directly applicable or effective in another due to these differences.
Potential response: Every country has its own historical, legal, and cultural contexts. This
doesn’t mean there should be any less effort towards addressing and ending institutional
racism. Please explain how less effort put towards ending institutional racism is beneficial for
any society?
●
One-Size-Fits-All Approach: The statement suggests that what works in France and
Germany should be a model for other countries. However, the solutions to address
institutional racism and promote equity can vary greatly from one context to another.
Taking a one-size-fits-all approach might not account for the unique challenges and
dynamics in each country or region.
Potential response: The prompt merely highlights the fact that countries such as France and
Germany are doing better compared with other world powers. This debate isn’t about defining a
one-size-fits all approach. It’s about using available resources to end institutional racism. Please
explain why you’re unwilling to use all available resources to end institutional racism?
●
Lack of Comprehensive Solutions: Addressing institutional racism is a complex and
multifaceted challenge that cannot be solely resolved through corporate policies and
practices. While such policies are essential, they are just one part of a broader strategy
that includes education, legislation, community engagement, and more. A more holistic
and comprehensive approach is often needed to make lasting and meaningful changes.
Potential response:
Team Con opening notes to be used in rebuttal/interrogation:
– “It [Business actions supporting DE&I] have actually caused more problems than solutions.” If
this is truly how you feel about ending institutional racism, why do you feel that all possible
avenues should be explored to accomplish this?
●
“There is no centralized firm when applying policies surrounding equity”
Then who should fight institutional racism
-”There are so many types of diversity, and businesses can’t help because its not thier main
focus.” This suggests that any agency not solely focused on diversity should not care about
institutional racism. Why do you feel that anyone who’s job isn’t to end racism shouldn’t care
about one of societies biggest and longest standing issues?
-You mentioned that it’s our claim that we must include businesses in solutions to figure out
DE&I issues, This conversation is about using resources to end institutional racism. Can you
explain why we shouldn’t use all possible resources to end institutional racism?
-”DE and I roles are decreasing, and there have been layoffs.” Does this mean that there should
be more or less levers should be pulled in order to promote equity?
-”aren’t we (supposed to be) talking about racism??
2. Rebuttal (5 min)
Hey all… this might be a helpful article for rebuttal: https://www.epi.org/publication/the-myth-ofrace-neutral-policy/
– Rebutter 1: Theresa
– The Summary from the Article is a great rebuttal. We may need to have two people read
it so we can fit it in.
– Rebutter 2: Sahana
– Equality/neutrality = giving everyone the same resources and opportunities for
success but failing to recognize that some people have a head start and some
have giant obstacles in their way
– Equity = recognizing that people come from different circumstances with different
obstacles and gives each person the resources and opportunities they need to
reach an equal outcome
– Race-neutrality does not address the already existing gaps ingrained in our
society from past policies and laws designed to benefit white people.
– Specific examples:
– “Fair Housing Act—Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968—outlaws
housing discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex,
disability, or familial status”
– However if you look at the homeownership rate of black
Americans it still lags 30 percentage points behind the
homeownership rates of white americans (adams, 2018).
–
This gap is largely due to past practices such as redlining
when lenders deny mortgage loans to communities of color
→ this resulted segregation of minorities into
neighborhoods with lower price appreciation and
investment – which puts them at a disadvantage even
when policies such as the Fair Housing Act makes future
practices such as redlining illegal, it doesn’t account for the
disadvantages placed on communities of color from past
discriminatory policies (Rothstein, 2017).
–
As a result, disparities in wealth continue to grow and
leave communities of color behind. Race neutrality refuses
to acknowledge the history that is ingrained into the fabric
of our society and still has real consequences for
communities of color today.
“France is colorblind”
– Focuses on addressing racial and ethnic disparities with a “place-based”
approach (socioeconomic) —> providing aid to specific buildings and
geographical zones that typically contain mostly minorities
– Borloo plan in 2005, which promoted urban renewal. It helped provide
decent and somewhat less concentrated housing in the poorest areas
which were made up of communities of color.
– Once some people get out of the poorer areas, they are replaced
with more. Problem is not effectively solved.
Anti Discrimination policies effectiveness in the workplace — does it actually bring about
change?
– The problem of discrimination and bias based on race is largely implicit rather
than conscious.
– While we still have a long way to go and we must acknowledge the imperfections
of existing anti discriminatory policies — they still go a long way in reducing
implicit bias
Legal ramifications on DEI initiatives
– While there are attacks on DEI not being “equal” treatment under the law, “In the
end, companies appear to face a greater threat of litigation over discrimination
against members of minority groups than from litigation over discrimination
against white people. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, there were about 2,350 charges of that latter form of discrimination
in employment in 2021, among about 21,000 race-based charges overall”
(Schiebler, 2023).
– “employers face liability not only for intentional discrimination under the law’s
“disparate treatment” branch, but also, under its “disparate impact” branch, for
facially neutral employment practices that disproportionately and unjustifiably
disadvantage on the basis of race or other protected traits”
Diversity in the workplace leads to less implicit bias, less conflict and more productivity
which benefits the economy.
– However studies show that the presence of individuals around you can alter your
Implicit Association Test results – more diverse = lower IAT (Williams 2014).
– A study that was conducted, people with the same backgrounds tend to
–
–
–
–
have many internal issues dealing with pride and competitiveness
amongst one another that may reduce productivity process due to unmade
decisions by the group. Teams assembled together that consist of
different ethnicities and backgrounds tend to have less conflict because
people have more understanding for one another, tend to be more
creative and have skills that accent each other. These teams also seem to
have a higher rate of productivity simply because each brings a set of
different tools to the table, from different kinds of experiences and
trainings (Le, 2008).
3. Interrogation (4 min)
– Interrogator 1: Zack (see interrogation strategy section above)
– Interrogator 2: Liam
– Interrogator 3:
– just putting this here for discussion later, if they hit us with the “society isn’t sending a
clear message”, we can easily turn it around in interrogation that individuals concerned
about others receiving “unfair” assistance, are they not concerned about their own
perceived inequities? Are they not sending a clear message that equity is important? Is it
not more accurate to say society is sending a clear message that equity is important, but
that we are not aligned on who should benefit from it?
4. Moderator Interrogation (4 min)
– Anyone/everyone!
5. Huddle (3 min)
6. Close (3 min)
– Closer 1: Haris Inequality is wrong; equity is right
– A diverse workforce fosters creativity and helps any organization achieve its full
potential. Studies have shown that companies can benefit from diversity if leaders create
a psychologically safe workplace, combat systems of discrimination, embrace the styles
of employees from different identity groups, and make cultural differences a resource for
learning and improving organizational effectiveness.
– Business should lead – we have the responsibility to utilize every lever and
business is a primary avenue to do so
– Businesses should lead to create more equity because businesses will benefit
the most from this action. Research and studies have proven that with the proper
culture, diverse teams can be more innovative at problem solving and produce
better results overall. Research also indicates that inclusive workplaces that
value and support employees from diverse backgrounds benefit from enhanced
employee engagement and productivity.
–
Equality is better for businesses and economies – It is socially and economically
beneficial when there is equity amongst all citizens
–
–
–
–
Equity can help drive business and the economy forward. If more people in the
workforce are paid equally and appropriately there will be more consumer spending to
stimulate the economy.
Equity in the workplace should be a basic business principle. We claim to be the land of
the free and the home of the brave but are we really all free if one group of citizens have
a clear head start and continuous advantage over all others. I urge you to do the right
thing not just for our generation but for future generations. Ask yourself do you really
promote a business culture that does not promote equity for all? This is a great
opportunity for America to lead and show the world what a great country we are for all
individuals, not just a certain set of individuals. This country was built on inequality. Let’s
change the narrative by business and government working together.
MC (Dan 1 minute): We close as we began, (probably sense a theme here!) the late civil
rights leader John Lewis said “When you see something that is not right, not just, not
fair, you have a moral obligation to say something. To do something. Our children and
their children will ask us, ‘What did you do? What did you say?” And I ask each of us,
what will you say to your children? Did you rise up to support a noble cause, did you use
your education and your leadership position in business to effect change? Leading the
charge in advancing equity within your role as leaders across numerous industries is not
only the moral thing to do, it is the right thing to do for your business. Do not wait for
governments stuck in the mire of politicking. Use the power you have at your disposal to
be the change you wish to see in the world.
Closer 2:
SUGGESTIONS FROM PROF:
Rebudget Time – Open = 5 min, Interrogation = 7 min
Everyone should have a clock or share with a partner
List out points that we want to make and allocate them to a slot in the debate
Don’t have to read the exact study, can just cite
Less points overall, more cites/examples for each. Three overall points may be enough.
Focus on presenting the argument that is consistent and well supported with arguments
Listen to your opponents – greatest opportunity to improve here!
THOUGHTS ON FUTURE DEBATES:
●
●
●
We should recommend the 3 or 4 high level points that we want to make
Debate leader should iterate our position then intro each of the high level points before
each person speaks for ~1.5 mins
1 individual should be responsible for speaking to each of the high level points, offering
evidence to support those points.
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Someone should be assigned to rebuttal research to create expected rebuttal points and
expected interrogation questions
We could benefit from having an opening MC who comes prepared with a pithy opening
and highlights the high level points before passing to evidence focused team members
We should have individuals that are dedicated on the opening, separate individuals
focusing on taking notes for rebuttal. Because we have people actively working on
rebuttal, we also need dedicated interrogation individuals
Maybe the MC closes as well
We should pre-write our opening statements in a google doc
We should have a computer/phone with a timer on that we can all see to see how much
we have left
We should also sit together (open, rebuttal, interrogation people)
Provide points THEN find evidence to support
RESOURCES:
Please include abstract, citation & DOI link, and a few key points
Title: Not settled law: race, civil rights, and social policy in a “Color Blind” society
Author: Eric S. Brown
Link: https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2022.2102434
Abstract: The emergence of the civil rights policy regime during the 1960s in the U.S. formalized
the transition from the pre–civil rights era to the civil rights era. As we see in this paper, the
subsequent post–civil rights era has been shaped by increasing challenges against principles of
civil rights law, chiefly by political conservatives. Indeed, opponents have had significant
success in undermining key parts of the civil rights policy regime. Conservatives and others
have sought to usher in an era of “color-blind” policy. Basic civil and political rights were thought
by most to be questions of “settled law” in the aftermath of the relatively successful civil rights
movement. However, “color blind” political opposition has challenged this assumption. Ironically,
this means that there is a yet unsuccessful battle to cement foundational civil and political rights
in the United States. Following Marshall, this further deters the development of more egalitarian
social rights.
Key Points:
● Conservative forces have been ascendant in the interim and have been very successful
at overturning key institutional elements of the modern liberal reform policies of the
Great Society era
●
●
●
The perception of “American exceptionalism” posits that the U.S. is unquestioningly a
“color blind,” “meritocratic” and “middle class” society. Empirically, the U.S. is one of the
more unequal (e.g. wealth, income, racial disparities) industrialized societies.
Trump’s executive order elevated tropes like “reverse discrimination” and “color
blindness” while it threatened to defund organizations with federal contracts if they
referred to concepts or theories that are used by social scientists, legal and education
scholars, and others to critically analyze discrimination itself
Though the Biden administration took over in Washington, Trump’s executive order
ideas have been adopted at the state level by numerous Republican governors. This
includes the Orwellian “outlawing” of ideas and practices such as diversity training,
critical race theory, white privilege, unconscious bias, ethnic studies, and
intersectionality.
My synopsis of how to utilize this article: The division of both national and local US government
has led to regression of longstanding civil rights issues impacting “othered” peoples. We cannot
rely on fragmented governments controlled by social extremists to effectively address
institutional racism and widespread inequity. Corporations should lead, pushing government to
enact policy through social pressure, lobbying, and political contributions
Title: Prioritizing Racial and Ethnic Equity in Business: Towards a Common Framework
Source: World Economic Forum
Link:
https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Prioritizing_Racial_and_Ethnic_Equity_in_Business_202
3.pdf
Overview: Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practice and programming have been
increasingly mainstreamed into the corporate space for the last 60 years. In the last decade, the
public and shareholders have increasingly called for greater transparency on actions and
outcomes regarding DEI. However, the lack of coherent standards around data collection and
reporting makes it challenging for businesses to assess gaps and track progress, especially on
issues related to race and ethnicity.The Global Racial & Ethnic Equity Framework and
accompanying briefing paper build on work of the World Economic Forum’s Partnering for
Racial Justice in Business Initiative — a global, cross-industry group committed to advancing
racial and ethnic equity bringing together 50+ companies.The briefing paper and framework
provide context on current challenges and opportunities, and identify pathways by which
corporations can prioritize racial and ethnic equity through a whole-of-business approach. It
originates from the World Economic Forum’s Centre for the New Economy and Society, which is
focused on shaping prosperous, resilient and equitable economies and societies that create
opportunity for all.
Citation:
(2023). Prioritizing Racial and Ethnic Equity in Business: Towards a Common Framework.
World Economic Forum, (January 2023), 4.
https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Prioritizing_Racial_and_Ethnic_Equity_in_Business_202
3.pdf
Title: Why Greater Diversity is an Economic Imperative
Source: US Chamber of Commerce
Citation:
Donahue, T. J. (2019, September 16). Why Greater Diversity is an Economic Imperative.
Employment Policy. Retrieved November 4, 2023, from
https://www.uschamber.com/employment-law/why-greater-diversity-economic-imperative
Key Points:
● W.K. Kellog Foundation: US economy stands to gain $8 trillion by 2050 just by closing
the racial equity gap
● Regarding business leadership: research shows a strong correlation between diversity in
leadership and quarterly e
