FOLLOW

Goldman Sachs to Remove DEI Hiring Standards from Board of Directors Criteria


2 min read - Last Updated:

Share

Table of Contents

Goldman Sachs Board DEI Removal Plan

Goldman Sachs plans to remove DEI hiring standards for its board of directors, as reported by The Wall Street Journal on Monday. The company previously eliminated a board diversity requirement for companies it took public last year. Now, it will scrub DEI language from criteria for its own board members this month.

The board's governing committee evaluates candidates based on four criteria, one of which defines diversity in traditional terms encompassing viewpoints, background, work, and military service. This section also references demographics such as race, gender identity, ethnicity, and sexual orientation, which the board now plans to excise.

The anticipated change stems from a September request by the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative nonprofit holding a small stake in the bank. Goldman Sachs reached a deal with the group, agreeing to implement the modification independently. In return, the NLPC withdrew a formal shareholder proposal ahead of the company's annual meeting.

Broader Context of DEI Policy Rejection

This development reflects a wider corporate retreat from DEI initiatives, accelerated by President Donald Trump's return to the White House. On his first day, Trump signed an executive order titled 'Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing,' directing federal agencies to eliminate DEI-style programs. The next day, a second order promoted merit-based opportunities, including reforms to federal contracting.

We’ve ended the tyranny of so-called Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies all across the entire federal government and indeed the private sector and our military. And our country will be woke no longer. — Donald Trump

Administration Actions Against DEI in Education

The Trump administration has also targeted DEI at elite universities, negotiating new funding agreements with institutions like Columbia University and Harvard. Harvard faced frozen federal research funding over antisemitism and woke ideology concerns. In April, Harvard sued the administration, claiming unconstitutional pressure on academic institutions. Lawyers for the administration appealed a judge's order in December to restore $2.7 billion in funding.




Most investors fare better with broad index funds and ETFs than trying to pick winning stocks, as data shows active managers consistently lag the market.

Why Picking Stocks Often Backfires: The Index Fund Reality Most Investors IgnoreWhy Picking Stocks Often Backfires: The Index Fund Reality Most Investors Ignore

Latest News

Good Reads

Introduction to Mortgage Choices
Understanding Regressive Taxes
What Is Blockchain Wallet?
What Is Net Income After Taxes?
What Is the Net Interest Rate Spread?

Articles

What Are Dissenters' Rights?
What Is a Gray Box?
What Is a Replacement Rate?
What Is a Short Position?
What Is an Amortized Loan?
What Is Bid Size?
What Is Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1)?
What Is Emigration?
What Is Ideation?
What Is Pareto Analysis?
What Is the Implied Rate?
What Is the Orphan Drug Credit?
What Is Units Per Transaction (UPT)?
What Is Warehouse Financing?

by using this website you agree to our Cookies Policy
ID 6235

Copyright © Info Gulp 2026