<p>Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) refers to policies, practices, and social norms aimed at promoting fair treatment and representation of people from historically disadvantaged groups, such as sexual, gender, and ethnic minorities. DEI’s institutionalization has been criticized by some as ineffective, wasteful and even antithetical to these aims, producing unintended negative side effects, such as threats to free speech and to the recognition of merit. Others maintain that DEI has had a net-positive influence, and that efforts to dismantle DEI programs in universities, business, and government are premature or unfounded. We reconcile these views by showing how critics and supporters of DEI alike could each advance their position if they (1) narrow the focus of debate to specific policies or programs, (2) evaluate how effectively programs or policies achieve their intended humanitarian outcomes through a targeted causal mechanism, and (3) build in the capacity to test for unintended negative consequences. Doing so avoids the mistake of overgeneralizing either the defense or condemnation of DEI by shifting focus to the strengths and failings of specific programs, and reveals novel avenues for researchers, policymakers, and the public to adjudicate the value of DEI programming.</p>