Goldman Sachs is preparing to eliminate race, gender identity, ethnicity, and sexual orientation from board selection criteria, according to a Wall Street Journal report.
The move aligns with growing political pressure in the United States to scale back DEI policies across government and corporate sectors.
Governance standards, shareholder activism, and board composition practices could shift across global financial institutions if the change is confirmed.
Governance Standards Shift Amid Political Pressure
Goldman Sachs is preparing to remove diversity related criteria from the framework its board governance committee uses to evaluate potential directors, according to a Wall Street Journal report citing people familiar with the matter.
The change would eliminate references to race, gender identity, ethnicity, and sexual orientation from candidate assessments. The report indicates the committee plans to rely on professional qualifications and experience rather than demographic considerations.
Reuters could not independently verify the report. Goldman Sachs declined to comment.
The potential policy revision comes amid a broader political campaign in the United States targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Since returning to office last year, President Donald Trump has challenged DEI programs across federal agencies and the private sector, arguing they are discriminatory.
Shareholder Activism And Regulatory Climate
Goldman’s move follows pressure from the conservative activist nonprofit National Legal and Policy Center, a small shareholder in the bank. The group submitted a proposal in September urging the firm to eliminate diversity criteria from its board selection process, according to the report.
The development highlights how shareholder proposals are increasingly being used to influence corporate governance priorities, particularly in politically sensitive areas such as workforce diversity and board composition.
Major financial institutions have faced rising scrutiny from policymakers and advocacy groups regarding ESG and DEI commitments. Several Wall Street peers, including Morgan Stanley and Citi, have softened diversity related language and initiatives amid shifting regulatory and political signals.
RELATED ARTICLE: Goldman Sachs Invests in Renewable Natural Gas Platform Synthica
Evolution Of Board Diversity Policies
Goldman Sachs has previously been viewed as an advocate for board diversity. The bank once required companies seeking its support for initial public offerings to have at least two diverse board members. That policy was later discontinued.
The firm also removed a dedicated “diversity and inclusion” section from its annual filing last year, reflecting a broader reassessment of how it communicates diversity priorities.
According to the report, Goldman’s governance committee currently evaluates director candidates using four primary criteria, including a broad interpretation of diversity that encompasses viewpoints, backgrounds, and professional and military experience. The planned revisions would remove explicit demographic references while maintaining consideration of experience and perspective.
Implications For Investors And Global Governance Norms
If implemented, the shift could influence governance norms across global financial institutions. Board composition has been a central pillar of ESG evaluation frameworks, with investors and proxy advisors often viewing diversity as a marker of effective oversight and risk management.
The rollback of explicit diversity metrics may complicate ESG scoring methodologies and introduce variability in how institutional investors evaluate governance quality.
At the same time, the move reflects a growing divergence between U.S. political priorities and global ESG expectations. Many European and international regulatory frameworks continue to emphasize gender and demographic diversity in board structures.
For executives and investors, the situation illustrates how governance practices are increasingly shaped by political dynamics, shareholder activism, and regulatory interpretation rather than a single global standard.
Whether Goldman Sachs formally adopts the change remains to be seen. If confirmed, the decision would mark another turning point in the evolving relationship between corporate governance, political pressure, and ESG accountability.
Follow ESG News on LinkedIn
