2025 has proven to be a pivotal year for DEI. In the US, President Donald J. Trump has issued three executive orders that put a target on corporate diversity, equity and inclusion policies, essentially declaring the concept illegal and discriminatory (e.g. Williams et al., 2025). The name of one of these executive orders sums up the political tug-of-war around DEI very well: “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy.”
President Trump’s anti-DEI policies have global implications, influencing policy and practice in other countries and impacting international conversations around fairness and equity (Ng et al., 2025). In 10-K investor filings by publicly traded US-based companies, mentions of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” have gone down by 57% (Bloomberg, 2025). At the same time, talk is cheap: Preliminary surveys in the US indicate that 75% of US companies have not changed their DE&I policies (Paradigm, 2025). Likewise, in Germany, around 90% of the signatories to the Diversity Charter stated that they intend to continue their DEI programs unchanged (Charta der Vielfalt, 2025).
How companies in Switzerland will react, it is partially too soon to tell. While some larger international companies headquartered here have cut their DEI goals (such as quotas for women in senior management) or changed their DEI guidelines (Aecherli et al., 2025). Others are hedging their bets, waiting and seeing, or even doubling down on their DEI efforts (ibid).
The three concepts work together as the following effective analogy shows: Diversity is being invited to the party. Inclusion is being asked to dance. Equity is making sure everyone has the skills and equipment they need to dance.
Having a diverse workforce is not enough – employees also need to feel included and supported in a fair environment to thrive. In other words, organizations need to proactively create inclusive environments that make it possible to leverage diversity’s potential benefits (Holvino, Ferdman, & Merrill-Sands, 2004).
What we do know: While companies are largely waiting and seeing, the business case for DEI remains strong when it comes to the employee perspective. For the first time, CCDI and Advance conducted a dedicated employee survey on Swiss workplace culture (spring 2025) to generate insights on DEI from the perspectives of talents. The survey included 608 participants (472 female, 130 male, four non-binary, two others) across large and mid-sized companies and all hierarchy levels. Quantitative analysis was complemented by qualitative feedback, which was overwhelming in amount, with over 430 text comments – this is an insight into how relevant the topic is to employees.
The key conclusion: Both female and male talents perceive DEI in the workplace as essential. 93% of survey respondents agree or strongly agree that DEI in the workplace is important to them. Looking at the response by gender, it’s 97% of women and 79% of men.
[insert]
Although 61% strongly agree that “DEI is important” to them personally, only 23% strongly agree that “their organization is committed to DEI”. Companies are called upon to either increase their DEI commitment and/or ensure that employees feel the effects of this commitment in their daily working lives.
61% of respondents agree or strongly agree that their organization should strengthen its DEI efforts. Over two-thirds feel that their company should specifically strengthen its inclusive workplace culture. 45% of women and 27% of men agree or strongly agree that an inclusive workplace culture needs improvement.
[insert]
This stark contrast between how important DEI is to employees and how they perceive their companies’ commitment indicates clearly: DEI initiatives in companies have room to grow. 2025 presents an opportunity to take stock, rethink what we’re doing, be more inclusive with our efforts, and build a better working culture for everyone. But DEI isn’t the only buzzword out there. Any conversation about DEI this year must include meritocracy, which is on everybody’s lips in 2025.
Why is it so important to include “meritocracy” in the DEI discourse? Meritocracy – a system in which merit or talent is the basis for sorting people into positions and distributing rewards where everyone has an equal chance to advance regardless of their gender, race, class, etc. – is framed in direct conflict with DEI (definition paraphrased from Castilla, 2010).
A few examples: Trump himself argued that DEI diminished “the importance of individual merit, aptitude, hard work, and determination when selecting people for jobs and services”. When Julie Sweet, CEO of Accenture, wrote a memo “sunsetting” many of the financial giant’s DEI policies, she made sure to point out that “we are and always have been a meritocracy.” In 2024, Alexandr Wang, founder of AI startup ScaleAI, coined the term MEI: merit, excellence, and intelligence, explaining that it means hiring “only the best person for the job” rather than selecting “winners and losers based on someone being the ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ race, gender, and so on.” MEI was lauded by the likes of Elon Musk (CEO or Tesla) and Brian Armstrong, founder of coinbase (Jacobs, 2025).
As recent new narratives around DEI question whether such efforts would benefit or undermine meritocratic principles, this year’s edition of the Gender Intelligence Report takes the opportunity to focus on the success factors of truly meritocratic systems and to explain how DEI and meritocracy reinforce one another. In fact, we will walk you through how the core principles of DEI and meritocracy perfectly align, how companies that have long been committed DEI champions already have the tools in place to boost meritocracy, and how inclusive leadership is key to building an organization where everyone has a fair chance to succeed.