Often on March 8, International Women’s Day, social media and offices are flooded with tulips and messages praising “women’s gentleness and beauty.” Yet behind this festive décor, there is often a much harsher reality. 

Building an inclusive and socially sustainable workplace requires time, money, and real effort, while the results are rarely immediate. Because of this, some organizations choose the easier path: handing out flowers while ignoring issues like pay gaps or glass ceilings. Instead of addressing deeper problems, companies may polish their public image to appear as responsible, open, and progressive, even when everyday workplace realities tell a different story. 

Many have heard of greenwashing, a term coined by environmental activist Jay Westerveld back in 1986. He criticized the hotel industry’s practice of inviting guests to reuse towels under the guise of environmental protection, when the true motive was simply to reduce laundry costs and increase profits at the expense of the environment.  

Greenwashing is a way for companies to pretend to be environmentally friendly and create the impression that they care about their environmental impact to attract customers and build a reputation as a responsible company, but in reality, their activities are not as “green” as is often claimed. [1] Over time, society has become more aware of such misleading environmental claims and better able to question labels like “eco-friendly” or “green”. 

However, in today’s corporate environment, a new and equally dangerous phenomenon is emerging – “pinkwashing” or, more broadly, the imitation of social responsibility. 

What lies behind the pink facade? 

The concept of pinkwashing first appeared in 2002 when the organization Breast Cancer Action called out companies that marked their products with a pink ribbon (the symbol for fighting breast cancer) while simultaneously manufacturing products containing carcinogenic substances. Over time, the term evolved to describe situations where organizations use marketing to position themselves as inclusive and socially responsible, while internally permitting discrimination, mobbing, or simply taking no real action. [2] 

Today discussions about social sustainability increasingly include a wider “spectrum of washing”, referred to as “social washing”, “DEI washing”, “human rights washing”, and “pinkwashing”. This describes situations when an organization’s external image stands in sharp contrast to its internal culture. For example, a company may present itself as an inclusive employer, while employees feel unheard, turnover remains high, and equal opportunities are limited. Many companies readily sign various commitments to support equality and diversity, but often do not go any further than that. 

The gap between words and actions

While there is a common perception that pinkwashing is merely harmless image-polishing, data from various European countries suggest otherwise.

The 2022 study “Inclusion at Work” by the UK’s Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) reveals a troubling trend: although 47% of employers claim to have an inclusion strategy, nearly a quarter (24%) of employees believe that their organizational leaders’ commitment exists only in words, not in actions. Furthermore, the study shows that performative allyship fosters cynicism among employees. [3]

A 2022 analysis of annual and sustainability reports of German publicly traded companies (German Diversity Index) [4] shows that while the majority of companies (approximately 2/3) extensively describe the importance of diversity management and its measures in their reports, a significantly smaller portion (35%) have implemented measurable goals, a specific budget, or linked executive board remuneration to the achievement of diversity targets.

According to Sustinere’s Baltic Sustainability Reporting Study 2025, which analyzed 220 companies, 68 companies addressed Diversity & Equal Treatment in their sustainability disclosures. Fewer than half of those – just 29 had set that commitment into concrete and specific diversity and inclusion targets. [5] This creates a strategy-execution gap, which is a classic sign of pinkwashing.

How to avoid pinkwashing?

If a company only talks, but does not act, the consequences are far-reaching. As Sarah Haimerl points out, greenwashing and pinkwashing can be avoided by utilizing similar internal processes. This requires internal measures, processes, and their synergy. Diversity management emphasizes – practicing internally what we promise (integrating promises into processes, such as fair pay and internal career opportunities), rather than just making promises and using beautiful slogans in sustainability and other reports. [6]

To avoid pinkwashing, a company should follow three core principles:

• Consistency. Before launching a public campaign, internal processes must be reviewed by asking: “Do our promises align with the daily experience of our employees?” This can be achieved through belonging surveys, Diversity pulse checks, focus groups, or HR data analysis.

• Avoiding empty promises. The golden rule of diversity management is to first act internally and only then communicate publicly. Practical steps may include implementing inclusive recruitment guidelines that mitigate the impact of unconscious bias, adapting internal codes of ethics, and establishing whistleblowing or grievance systems for conflict situations.

• Systemic approach. Inclusion cannot be treated only as a communication or marketing initiative. It needs to be integrated into organizational decision-making. This may involve setting measurable diversity and inclusion goals and linking their implementation to the management remuneration system, allocating a specific budget to inclusion initiatives, as well as assessing human rights compliance and social responsibility within the supply chain.

Our experience at Sustinere shows that meaningful change begins when organizations shift their focus from polished messaging to improving internal practices. Copmpanies demonstrate a real maturity when they are willing to openly evaluate their current situation and treat it as a benchmark for a progress, rather than trying to replace shortcomings with carefully crafted communication.

From the employees’ perspective, honesty is valued more than a perfectly polished corporate image. While “pinkwashing” may generate immediate attention and short-term wins, in the long run, it is a costly and risky strategy that erodes corporate reputation and employee trust.

If you would like to explore this topic further and learn practical ways to build a more inclusive workplace, we invite you to join Sustinere Masterclass: Effective Diversity Management.

To learn more, please contact us at: [email protected]