Voices behind walking the talk: Quantified qualitative insights on D&I policy support reasoning

Abstract

Effective Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) policy depends on both attitudinal endorsement and behavioral enactment. Yet little is known about why individuals support or fail to support D&I policy in either domain. Based on survey data from 2,639 employees in a Dutch organization, we employed k-means clustering to identify five D&I policy support profiles: Champions and Opponents (supportive or resistant in both attitude and behavior), along with three more nuanced groups—Ambivalents (ambivalent in both domains), Bystanders (attitudinally supportive but behaviorally passive), and Reluctants (behaviorally engaged but attitudinally skeptical). To examine underlying reasoning, we applied a mixed-method approach combining qualitative content analysis and Latent Class Analysis. Five distinct reasoning patterns emerged. Mapping these onto support profiles revealed that Champions and Bystanders often expressed ideological endorsement of D&I, while Reluctants voiced critical yet constructive concerns about policy implementation. Opponents expressed meritocratic beliefs or policy unawareness, and Ambivalents reported policy unawareness or inaccessibility. We additionally examined whether these patterns varied across organizational positions (managers vs. employees) and group membership (minority vs. majority). This integrative analysis demonstrates that D&I policy support and resistance are multidimensional and grounded in diverse rationales. Our findings underscore the importance of tailored strategies that address diverse motives behind support, resistance, disengagement, ambivalence, and reluctant compliance.