[{"id":1027,"title":"The Strategic Depth Theory of Diversity \u0026 Inclusion","sha":"eaaaba5c2f279de4f24b6b1f9a355a9b","user_id":null,"state":"published","body":"It would be easy to assume that the increase in workplace Diversity and Inclusion programs was caused by corporate executives becoming more politically progressive. Is this even true? Per Fos, Kempf, and Tsoutsoura (2022), approximately; 69 % of corporate executives identify as Republicans. If this uptick in D\u0026I programs is not connected political orientation of leadership, what can explain this phenomenon? One potential cause for this shift could be firms wanting to avoid discrimination lawsuits. Lawsuits are monetarily costly and detrimental to the company’s reputation and impact future sales.\r\n\r\n\r\nThis is what the Strategic Depth Theory of  Diversity  \u0026 Inclusion attempts to answer.  Strategic Depth is a concept from military strategy; defined as “… the distances between the front lines or battle sectors and the combatants’ industrial core areas, capital cities, heartlands, and other key centers of population or military production...\" (Harkavy, 2001). Similar to how Israel gained Strategic Depth from the acquisition of the Westbank (Eisenkot, 1997), corporations obtain this geopolitical advantage by distancing themselves from the litigious incident by cultivating  D\u0026I programs. The Executives can then claim that the firm does not condone discriminatory behavior, effectively creating distance between the plaintiff and the firm.","created_at":"2022-11-27T03:11:05.144Z","updated_at":"2023-02-07T14:00:26.898Z","zenodo_id":7370019,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7370019","subject":null,"tags":["strategic depth","military strategy","diversity \u0026 inclusion","geopolitics","litigation","corporate governance"],"vote_count":1,"view_count":1,"score":1.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":false,"attachment_file_name":null,"attachment_content_type":null,"attachment_file_size":null,"attachment_updated_at":null}]