Special Edition: August DEI Talent Trends with Jennifer Tardy
This is #IncreaseDiversity, a weekly newsletter series + Increase Diversity Toolbox sharing best practices for employers who want to learn how to… well, increase diversity. To see previous editions, visit JenniferTardy.com. | IG: @IncreaseDiversity | Increase Diversity - YouTube
Eight months into 2025, and the workplace landscape looks nothing like it did last year or even last quarter. In a matter of months, federal orders rolled back DEI programs, college pipelines lost support, and the very vocabulary of equity became a political flashpoint. However, the needs haven’t changed. Companies still need smart, diverse teams. They still need cultures that attract and retain talent. And they still need to avoid the legal mess that comes from getting this wrong.
This month, we’re taking a hard look at three trends changing how organizations hire, train, and protect their people. Our CEO Jenn Tardy weighs in with straight talk on what’s happening and how to lead through it with clarity and conviction.
Let’s get started.
Trend #1: Federally Mandated Apprenticeships and the Redirection of DEI-Oriented College Pipelines
Washington is aggressively reshaping how Americans enter the workforce. A new executive order directs federal agencies to “reach and surpass 1 million new active apprentices,” pouring energy into on-the-job training programs. To achieve this goal, the U.S. Department of Labor awarded approximately $84 million in grants to all 50 states and territories, with a focus on construction, manufacturing, and emerging AI-driven sectors, among other actions. President Trump has openly criticized traditional higher education funding, arguing many college programs don’t incentivize the skills employers need. This shift means resources are being pulled from college-to-career pipelines, often the same pipelines that diversity recruiters spent years cultivating. In fact, several federal grants aimed at expanding apprenticeships (including innovative teacher-training apprenticeships to boost educators of color) were abruptly rescinded. Supporters say a “skills-first” apprenticeship model opens doors for talent without four-year degrees, potentially widening access. But others note a worrisome trade-off: campus diversity initiatives are losing support, and with affirmative action struck down, companies fear a dip in college graduates from underrepresented backgrounds.
Questions to Consider:
How can we leverage the boom in apprenticeships to expand opportunity, not narrow it?
If college diversity pipelines falter, what new strategies can we adopt to recruit and support talent from various backgrounds?
Are we at risk of losing progress by shifting away from programs that helped underrepresented students enter professional careers?
Jenn Tardy’s Response: This move is very on-brand for the new administration. And listen, I’ve always been an advocate for skills-first pathways and apprenticeships. They can open doors for people who don’t have a degree, and that’s important. But here’s the catch: the money to fund these programs is being pulled from places that were already helping marginalized students succeed in college. That’s where I have a real concern.
It shouldn’t be an either/or. We need apprenticeships, and we need strong college pipelines, especially for underrepresented students who choose the degree path. If we cut those supports, we risk losing the progress that’s been made in diversifying professions that still require higher education: law, medicine, teaching, leadership roles.
The question becomes this: how do we leverage apprenticeships so they expand opportunity instead of narrowing it? I think it starts with being intentional. If companies are shifting energy into apprenticeships, make sure those programs are designed with equity in mind, recruit from underrepresented communities, build in mentorship, and tie the skills training to real career advancement.
At the same time, don’t abandon colleges completely. There are creative ways to keep investing: scholarships, partnerships with university affinity groups, internships that connect classroom learning to workplace skills. Those still matter.
The bottom line is that apprenticeships can absolutely be a win for equity if we build them thoughtfully. But if they come at the expense of programs that were already leveling the playing field in higher education, we’re just trading one barrier for another.
Trend #2: Covert DEI Strategies Through Rebranded “Inclusive Innovation” Frameworks
In 2025’s charged political climate, many organizations are swapping out the terminology but quietly keeping the work. After a Trump executive order ended federal DEI programs, even agencies like NASA removed words like “equity” and “inclusion” from their websites. Corporate America felt the tremors. Rather than halt inclusion efforts, however, many companies are getting creative (maybe opportunistic) with rebranding. JPMorgan Chase, for example, dropped the word “Equity” and now touts “Diversity, Opportunity, and Inclusion,” as if “equity” had opposed “opportunity.” Across industries, there’s talk of “workplace engagement” and “people-first strategy” instead of overt DEI. The term “inclusive innovation” is gaining traction as a way to tie diversity to business outcomes and growth. This covert approach allows firms to continue equity training, mentorship programs, and resource groups under “‘safer’” labels. It’s DEI by another name—born from legal scrutiny and anti-DEI rhetoric. Still, the mission hasn’t changed: leaders know diverse teams drive innovation and profit, and many (over 80% in one survey) are maintaining or even doubling down on inclusion goals despite the backlash. The challenge, however, is balancing authenticity with optics.
Questions to Consider:
Are we changing semantics only or also the substance of our inclusion efforts?
What new language best conveys our inclusion goals in a way that resonates across the political spectrum?
How will we know if rebranded “inclusive innovation” initiatives are making a real difference for employees day-to-day?
Jenn Tardy’s Response: What’s happening right now isn’t so much the work changing as it is the words changing. Equity and inclusion have become political hot buttons, so companies are swapping in terms like “people-first” or “inclusive innovation” to keep moving forward without stirring up trouble.
The risk is when it’s just a word swap. If all we do is rebrand to make things look safe but don’t stay focused on real change for employees, it’s just window dressing.
At JTC, we’ve always said the real issue is resistance. And resistance isn’t really political; it’s human. People resist what they don’t understand. So whether you call it DEI, people-first, or inclusive innovation, the work is still about helping leaders face bias and build workplaces that feel fair and supportive.
Ask this instead: does this effort make employees feel more seen and supported day-to-day? If yes, the name doesn’t matter as much. If no, it’s just camouflage.
You’ll know these efforts are real if:
They show up in retention and representation data.
Leaders back up words with consistent actions.
Employees say they feel a stronger sense of belonging.
At the end of the day, the name can change. The work and purpose shouldn’t. The language that works across the board is tied to things everyone values, like fairness, opportunity, and innovation. We can meet people where they are with those words, but we can’t forget the backbone: equity. Because without it, nothing else sticks.
Trend #3: Back to the Old Days: Discrimination Litigation Reemerges
Until the 1990s, before evolving into comprehensive inclusion and equity initiatives, DEI efforts primarily focused on preventing discrimination litigation. In 2025, many companies have cut back or eliminated DEI positions and programs in an effort to comply with the current administration. However, this move risks reviving biases, stereotypes, and discrimination, potentially leading to a resurgence of discrimination lawsuits. Companies that abandon their commitment to increase diversity, equity, inclusion, and retention may quickly find themselves facing legal challenges that require them to rebuild their DEI efforts from the ground up.
Questions to Consider:
What are the legal implications of reducing DEI efforts in the workplace?
How can companies mitigate the risk of discrimination lawsuits while navigating changes in DEI policies?
Will the pendulum swing back toward stronger initiatives to increase diversity and retention as the consequences of rollbacks become apparent?
Jenn Tardy’s Response: This is déjà vu in some ways. Before we even called it DEI, the whole point of these efforts was to help companies avoid lawsuits by reducing bias and discrimination. If organizations now start cutting back DEI roles and programs to fit the political moment, they could find themselves right back where they started, facing claims of discrimination and hostile work environments.
The legal risk is real. When you stop investing in inclusion, you don’t magically erase bias; it just goes unchecked. And when that happens, employees notice, and lawyers notice, too.
To me, the smarter move is this: even if you scale back the branding or the visibility of DEI, you still need to keep practices in place that protect your people and your company. Initiatives like consistent training, fair promotion processes, transparent pay practices, and a clear way for employees to report issues are as important as they were in the past. That’s not “extra” but basic risk management.
And I do think the pendulum will swing back. Once lawsuits pile up or companies see turnover spike, they’ll be forced to remember why these roles and programs existed in the first place. My hope is that organizations won’t wait for the backlash to remind them. They’ll stay the course, even quietly, because prevention is always less costly (financially and reputationally) than cleanup.
Wrapping Up
The ways to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion may have changed. The language definitely has. But the need for them hasn’t gone anywhere. Perhaps the next era of DEI won’t be about slogans. It’ll be about what shows up in the data, decisions, and people’s daily experience at work. And that’s where leadership still counts.