[alephnullshabba]

I'm surprised I don't come across this perspective more often. ESG funds reached 15% of the total global securities market in assets under management (although much of this was merely a reclassification of existing investments). It seems very reasonable to conclude that ESG funds/scorings became the primary market incentive driving the corporate DEI initiatives we've seen rolled out this past decade.

Publicly traded companies operate under a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders (maximizing long-term shareholder value). For consumer-facing companies one could easily argue these initiatives are part of a broader marketing/corporate branding strategy that benefits shareholders. But, for large publicly-traded companies that don't rely on retail consumer sentiment, I presume DEI initiatives were primarily a strategy to attract investment from ESG funds and help quell potential regulatory action/political controversies

I'm ultimately not sure how reasonable my take is (I have no insider experience or knowledge) but would love to hear from someone with relevant first-hand knowledge and get their perspective

[KaiserPro]

Loads of companies saw a fresh source of capital. but it had strings, you couldn't be an evil mining company, use exploitative labour practices or generally be shitty.

Obviously thats hard to do and still maintain a massive profit, so some did the next easiest thing to greenwashing: hiring some DEI consultants and PR people to take some photos of the three employees with blue hair and melanin.

ESG is still a thing, despite some finance bros making a fuss.

[myroon5]

> couldn't be an evil mining company, use exploitative labour practices or generally be shitty.

ESG ratings champion companies in industries killing millions: https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/how-tobacco-companies-are...

reminiscent of the comic of people being bombed in awe that 'They say the next [bombs] will be sent by a woman!'