Interview: How to navigate D&I and inclusive leadership

An interview with Kim De Meulenaere and Lisa Janssens of the University of Antwerp

Diversity and inclusion are having a moment and not necessarily in the way organisations hope. In fact, some of the most powerful companies in the world have been quietly backing away from their D&I policies.

Some employers double down, embedding D&I into strategy, while others are unsure what to say publicly. Either way, even well-intended D&I initiatives can produce outcomes nobody plans for.

In response, we sat down to discuss potential solutions with Kim De Meulenaere, Associate Professor of Human Resource Management and Organisational Behaviour at the University of Antwerp, and Lisa Janssens, FWO PhD Fellow at the same university.

What is the current state of D&I?

For years, organisations have focused mainly on increasing diversity as it is believed that this will help them gain new perspectives and knowledge advantages. However, over time this idea has shifted.

D&I has moved through several phases: from that initial push for ‘more diversity,’ to the realisation that diversity without inclusion changes very little.

Kim explains, “Gradually the insight also emerged that diversity in numbers alone does not help you as an organisation. First, you must do something with those differences.”

The missing link here is inclusion, which is non-negotiable. Inclusion is an everyday practice that determines whether diverse teams can thrive.

“With diversity you also need inclusion, because diversity alone brings the challenges and not the benefits.”

However, we’re entering a new stage in which inclusion itself is proving far more complicated, sometimes generating unintended negative effects.

Many employees also feel that their companies don’t go far enough in implementing D&I policies, whereas these companies still find them difficult to implement.

Kim adds, “They want to do something, but they always run into resistance.”

“We’re not saying don’t do diversity and inclusion initiatives. The idea is: if you want to do D&I well, you must consider that unintended effects can also occur and you should try to prevent them.”

Why does D&I feel more negative right now?

The concept of D&I may feel more fragile than it did a few years ago for several reasons, including geopolitics, regulation, and the growing polarisation of public debate.

“People often start to think in terms of ‘us and them’ - majority versus minority - which can quickly trigger zero-sum thinking: “If someone else gets something, then there is less left for me,” Kim explains.

External pressure, particularly within the political landscape, plays a significant role in the rejection of D&I.

Kim continues, “In the US, companies are not just discouraged – they are really forbidden to do anything around diversity and inclusion. There are also European companies that are quietly starting to adopt that.”

Additionally, PhD research at the university found that the average branding by companies around diversity and inclusion has also decreased over the last three years, indicating that there is a need for a change in perception surrounding these initiatives.

What are the benefits of successful D&I initiatives?

Despite the negative press, D&I still has strong evidence to suggest initiatives work when applied correctly.

The research is there to prove this, as Kim says, “If there is sufficient D&I, an organisation can be between 5-20% more productive.”

“Different perspectives shared, more creativity, more innovation, faster decision‑making.”

The social benefits cannot be underestimated either: “People feel much less discriminated against and feel they belong much more.”

Kim concludes, “It is probably still the case that more positive effects are found than negative effects.”

What are the unintended drawbacks of D&I?

All this is not to say that D&I initiatives cannot backfire if applied improperly and without due diligence. Although meant with good intentions, sometimes they can miss the mark. One example would be blame-framed bias training. As Kim warns,

“If you ask people to suppress their stereotypes, you actually trigger those stereotypes more. Certain diversity initiatives sometimes really lead to more discrimination rather than less.”

False progress is also a risk. Once a policy exists, people might hold the misguided belief that inclusion is already solved:

“As soon as there are diversity and inclusion initiatives, employees think: ‘We have a diversity and inclusion policy. We are inclusive.’”

“It can actually lead to less conscious reflection about being inclusive.”

Like D&I initiatives, inclusive leadership can also have unintended effects. It is essential, however, because D&I policies only succeed when employees feel them in their everyday interactions.

Where does inclusive leadership come into play?

Inclusive leadership can deliver significant benefits, including greater intrinsic motivation, a stronger sense of autonomy, belonging and competence, and increased empowerment.

However, as Lisa’s research shows, it can also be paradoxical. As Lisa explains:

“Inclusive leadership actually sets two different psychological processes in motion at the same time.”

It can offer psychological safety and reduce stress: “Employees feel freer to share opinions and ideas and to discuss problems in difficult or stressful situations.”

However, inclusive leadership can also increase stress through felt obligation: “Employees may start to feel obligated to do something in return, and that sense of obligation becomes in itself an important source of stress.”

“The effect of inclusive leadership on stress is not straightforward. It is very complex.”

The risks are upheld within diverse teams, as Lisa continues: “In more diverse teams, the stress‑increasing effect becomes more visible and stronger.”

Essentially, the goal is to design inclusion, so you keep the safety while managing the obligation, rather than dialing it down. Kim explains:

“Whether you have a diverse team or not, inclusive leadership is important. It all starts with psychological safety.”

What actions can leaders take?

To create psychological safety within inclusive leadership, Lisa suggests starting small, rather than implementing wider programs: “Even if it’s just doing a short check‑in with each employee at the start of each day – those are small signals that make employees feel they are truly treated inclusively.”

Leaders should also aim to be consistent and transparent to alleviate the pressure of felt obligation. Lisa says, “Consistency in behaviour is very important, and it makes employees’ work experiences more pleasant and more positive.”

Kim recommends shifting the narrative, advising leaders to: “Create a sense of urgency for everyone, and show why it is important for everyone.”

Similarly, Kim believes that resistance should be viewed as productive, explaining that: “The resistance that appears is useful. It should be framed as feedback to refine the policy.”

What can we take from this?

It’s important to remember that D&I still offers more positive impacts than negative, but leadership design is the deciding factor as to whether employees feel safe or pressured.

Leaders should use inclusive leadership deliberately to protect psychological safety and set boundaries that reduce felt obligation.

As Kim puts it, “This research should not be used against D&I, but to improve it.”