Once a symbol of progress and cultural awareness, the acronym DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) has increasingly become a point of contention. In boardrooms and universities across the world, what began as a push for fairness has turned into a culture war. And with Trump’s crackdown on diversity efforts gaining ground, institutions are being forced to pick a side: stand firm or fold under the pressure.

Diversity and inclusion have become central themes in the language of modern institutions, especially within academia, and the Stockholm School of Economics (SSE) is no exception. Yet, beneath the surface of public commitments, a more complicated story starts to unfold. As political forces intensify and the DEI programs are more closely examined, the question looms: Is the commitment to diversity genuine, or simply a way to manage public perception? This piece explores whether SSE’s commitment to DEI can be considered sincere and whether there is a risk of backtracking as political winds shift.

But first, let’s recap.

The foundations of DEI can be traced back to the American civil rights movement of the 1950s. However, the term itself was first coined in the 1980s as a way to “enhance the diversity consciousness of white males.” It gained wider notoriety during the 2010s, as top U.S. universities established dedicated offices to advance DEI across their campuses. In tandem, the world’s largest companies began investing heavily in DEI programs and titles like “Chief DEI Officer” became common. SSE even introduced the position of “Equality & Diversity Manager” within its ranks.

Simply put, DEI became the darling acronym of the corporate world. Spending on initiatives to increase the number of women in boardrooms knew no bounds. And long gone were the days when the origin of your surname was more important for getting a job than your actual qualifications.

But the DEI movement didn’t rise without resistance. Some of the more nuanced voices warned it was at risk of becoming a box-ticking exercise, in which meeting quotas would overshadow actual change. More extreme critics went further by claiming that by placing identity over merit, DEI programs created a new form of discrimination. In their view, opportunities were no longer allocated based on competence or performance, but on demographics. This, critics argued, would breed resentment and a sense that the playing field was being tilted rather than leveled.

Donald Trump has led a dramatic rollback of DEI initiatives since returning to office. Federal programs are now being phased out and gender policies have been redefined to a strictly binary view. This shift is not limited to the public sector; many private companies, including Amazon, Walmart, and Goldman Sachs, have altered or softened their DEI goals under increasing political and financial pressure. Similarly, academic institutions like Harvard, which faces federal scrutiny over its DEI policies, are feeling the impact. This trend of retreat has also reached Europe, with Swedish companies like Ericsson omitting references to "diversity" in their reports.

Like the Swedish companies, the Stockholm School of Economics is also finding itself at a crossroads, navigating both international expectations and its own legacy. Under this new world logic, SSE must decide whether to keep its commitment to diversity and inclusion or shift to avoid potential backlash. As an institution at the intersection between business and education, SSE is in a unique position to either continue its efforts to advance DEI or risk undermining the progress made by bending to political forces.

In a recent opinion piece published in Swedish daily newspaper Dagens Nyheter, SSE President Lars Strannegård made his stance clear. He referred to the Trump administration’s influence on American universities as a “chainsaw massacre” and criticized the stripping of public funding for schools using terms like “diversity” and “inclusion”. The gender equality plan, last revised in 2024, highlighted the goal of achieving a minimum 40/60 ratio between males and females across all categories at SSE. Safe to say, gender equality is still a key aim for the school, at least in the outward appearance and external communication.

Debate around gender equality at SSE has persisted for years. In 2016, the anthology 179 Years of Solitude featured the experiences of ten women connected to SSE working within an academic environment with a strong tradition of being dominated by males. The book exposed the prevailing inequalities and unwritten rules within SSE and came about after internal documents showed that the aim for number of female professorships was staggeringly low; only 20%.

In a Minimax article from 2018, Lars Strannegård mentioned in an interview that the anthology had helped “break down barriers” in the endeavor to increase gender equality at SSE. Furthermore, he claimed that SSE “still needs more female professors” and highlighted the importance of ensuring gender equality to increase the international ranking of the school. Indeed, it is hard to miss the management’s obsession with SSE’s placings in international rankings, particularly those by the Financial Times.

And this is not by mistake. International rankings are an important factor in sustaining the donations that are made to SSE. These donations make up a large portion of the funding for Sweden’s only privately run and funded institution for higher education. In last year’s annual report, Strannegård’s final conclusion was: “SSE must continually strive towards achieving gender equality in order to ensure that we attract the most competent employees and students.”

But have these initiatives produced tangible improvements?

While it is true that the proportion of female faculty has increased, the proportion of female full-time professorships in 2023 was still only 20%. This is markedly lower than that of other Swedish universities with an average of 32%. Furthermore, the annual report for 2024 showed that approximately 37% of the newly admitted students of the Business & Economics program were female. In 2017, the rate peaked at 46% but has been lower since. For these reasons, the lack of gender equality at SSE has been the subject of public discourse in Sweden for several years.

This might make the skeptical reader raise an eyebrow. Questions arise as to whether the visible increase in female representation at SSE is more about public appearance than actual transformation. Despite claims of making headway, the numbers show slow and uneven progress. Female professors remain underrepresented, and gender parity in faculty positions remains elusive. This suggests that rankings and public image may be the prioritized and overarching goal for the school.

As SSE promotes gender equality, one might wonder whether it’s genuinely working to break down barriers, or merely echoing the rhetoric while doing the bare minimum. The challenge, then, is whether SSE and similar institutions can move beyond numbers and create environments where diversity, inclusion, and equity are truly realized, not just reported; especially given the global shift in trends.

This all relates back to the broader context of the ongoing battle over diversity, equity, and inclusion. The situation at the Stockholm School of Economics is a microcosm of the larger tension playing out across institutions globally. As political forces work to tear down DEI initiatives, there is a growing need to critically examine whether these programs are advancing equality, or simply serve as performative gestures. The case of SSE underscores the tension between optics and actual change. It also highlights how the improvements that have been made are at risk of being backtracked. The foundations on which these improvements were made might simply not be strong enough.

Bibliography:

Åsén, Josefina. « The struggle for gender equality in fair winds and foul ». Universitetsläraren, 4 november 2024, https://universitetslararen.se/2024/11/04/the-struggle-for-gender-equality-in-fair-winds-and-foul/.

Crary, Gwenevere. « The Origin of DEI ». Guide to HR, 12 june 2023, https://guidetohr.com/the-origin-of-dei/.

« Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion ». Wikipedia, 15 april 2025. Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion&oldid=1285725751.

« Handelshögskolan i Stockholm ». Wikipedia, 10 april 2025. Wikipedia, https://sv.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Handelsh%C3%B6gskolan_i_Stockholm&oldid=57276373.

Lännerholm, Hannes. Ericsson viker sig för Trump – MP:s ilska. 1 april 2025, https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/sverige/mp-ilskan-efter-ericssons-besked-obehaglig-utveckling/.

« Ledare: Universiteten måste skärpa sig, det är 2017 ». DN.se, 4 february 2017, https://www.dn.se/arkiv/ledare/universiteten-maste-skarpa-sig-det-ar-2017/.

Maria Askerfjord Sundeby et Ditte Hammar. « ”179 år av ensamhet” på Handelshögskolan ». SVT Nyheter, 8 march 2016, https://www.svt.se/kultur/helt-besatta-av-kon.

« Meet Our Expert HR Team ». Guide to HR, https://guidetohr.com/the-team/. 

Munir, Zehra, et Andrew Jack. « Trump administration halts $2.2bn in Harvard funds after university defies pressure ». Financial Times, 15 april 2025.

Stockholm, Lars Strannegård Professor och rektor vid Handelshögskolan i. « Lars Strannegård: Det pågår en motorsågsmassaker på amerikanska universitet ». DN.se, 7 april 2025, https://www.dn.se/kultur/lars-strannegard-det-pagar-en-motorsagsmassaker-pa-amerikanska-universitet/.

Strannegård, Lars. Program 40/60 2030. 1 march 2024, https://www.hhs.se/contentassets/2a70f692071647ec8a1bcd18caeb4b31/sse-gender-equality-plan-2024-03-01.pdf.

Tauschinski, Jana, et al. « US companies drop DEI from annual reports as Trump targets corporate values ». Financial Times, 16 march 2025.

Ferreira, P.C., PessÙa, S. de A. and Veloso, F.A. (2012) ‘On The Evolution of TFP in Latin America’, Fundação Getulio Vargas [Preprint]. Available at: https://portalibre.fgv.br/sites/default/files/2021-03/tfp-in-latin-america.pdf.

Total Factor Productivity at Constant National Prices for Argentina (2023) FRED. Available at: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RTFPNAARA632NRUG?utm_source=chatgpt.com (Accessed: 5 May 2025).

Pou, P. (2000) Argentina’s Structural Reforms of the 1990s, International Monetary Fund. Available at: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/03/pou.htm#:~:text=The%20Argentine%20economy%20fared%20badly,in%20pursuit%20of%20safer%20havens. (Accessed: 05 May 2025).

Öncü, T. S. (2025) Argentina’s Economic Shock Therapy: Assessing the Impact of Milei’s Austerity Policies and the Road Ahead - Prime, Prime Economics. Available at: https://primeeconomics.org/articles/argentinas-economic-shock-therapy-assessing-the-impact-of-mileis-austerity-policies-and-the-road-ahead/ (Accessed: 5 May 2025).