A slew of 2024 proxy studies have reached the same conclusion: the prevalence of DEI in executive compensation is “not only widespread, but increasing in prevalence.” So what, if anything, is changing?
Metrics up, detail down: According to a new Teneo study, some (not all, not even most) companies are disclosing less detail in order to pacify anti-DEI activists, but this risks angering investors.
Teneo found 69% of the S&P 500 now use DEI metrics, up from 66% last year – and only 10 companies removed DEI disclosures while 16 companies added them.
Of those disclosing DEI metrics, 55% provided the same level of detail as last year while a third scaled back disclosures. This included removing the specific metrics or goals used, changing the term to inclusion or belonging, and broadening from diversity to talent.
About half of companies still use objective, rather than subjective, DEI metrics, and these companies were less likely to reduce the level of detail disclosed.
Although representation metrics remain by far the most common, others included inclusive culture, supplier diversity, belonging scores, talent initiatives and DEI strategy execution.
About 42% of companies now formalize DEI metrics as a weighted component or modifier (up from 38% last year) and the impact is limited to 5-10% of incentive payout.
What’s next: Semler believes DEI prevalence may soften in response to political pressure, while Teneo argues that investor and proxy advisor constraints make this unlikely.
As this NACD blog notes, the majority of successful anti-DEI initiatives have been directed at diversity trainings, fellowships, grants, and the like, rather than the use of reasonable DEI metrics in executive pay.
However, some risk remains – clearly state the connection between use of DEI metrics and business objectives “to minimize the chance that such efforts appear performative.”
Ani Huang
Senior Executive Vice President, Chief Content Officer, HR Policy Association
Contact Ani Huang LinkedIn