Lululemon, a popular athletic apparel brand, has long been known for its aspirational lifestyle and emphasis on personal wellness. With over 500 stores worldwide, the company built a reputation for promoting health, mindfulness, and inclusivity. However, in 2020, this image was challenged following a racial incident within the company’s corporate structure.
The incident occurred after the murder of George Floyd, which sparked a national reckoning with systemic racism and racial injustice. Amid the Black Lives Matter protests, many corporations sought to align their messages with the movement’s call for justice. Within Lululemon, however, a high-level manager’s suggestion to use “all lives matter” on the company’s website raised significant concerns among employees and the public.
The “All Lives Matter” Incident
In the aftermath of George Floyd’s death, Lululemon assembled a task force at its Vancouver headquarters to craft a response to the unfolding events. The team of designers and copywriters proposed a design for the company’s homepage, featuring “Black Lives Matter” as the headline, in line with the broader movement’s message.
However, a high-level manager disrupted the process by demanding that the homepage text be changed to include “all lives matter.” This phrase had become synonymous with downplaying the significance of the Black Lives Matter movement, leading to immediate resistance from several employees, especially those who were Black, Indigenous, or people of color (BIPOC). The manager’s insistence on the new copy triggered a heated debate within the group.
The backlash from employees was significant. Many felt the proposed change was offensive and disregarded the gravity of the ongoing racial justice movement. Despite the internal pushback, the manager continued to press for “all lives matter.” Ultimately, leadership decided against this approach, opting for the original “Black Lives Matter” design. However, the damage was done—the high-level manager left Lululemon shortly after the incident.
Broader Allegations of Racial Insensitivity
The “all lives matter” incident was not isolated; it was part of a broader pattern of racial insensitivity within Lululemon’s corporate culture. Just weeks earlier, another incident involving racial insensitivity occurred. Art Director Trevor Fleming posted a link to a T-shirt on his personal Instagram account with a design called “Bat Fried Rice,” depicting a Chinese takeout box with bat wings. This offensive design played into racist stereotypes related to the global coronavirus outbreak, leading to significant backlash against Lululemon.
Additionally, Lululemon’s founder, Chip Wilson, had a history of making insensitive remarks. In a now-deleted blog post, Wilson explained that the company’s name was chosen to appeal to Japanese consumers by including the letter “L,” a sound not present in Japanese phonetics. This marketing ploy’s overt racial connotation sparked outrage and brought attention to Lululemon’s questionable approach to diversity.
These incidents revealed deeper issues within Lululemon’s corporate culture. Employees who experienced these events described a culture that struggled with racial sensitivity and inclusion. Many reported a lack of diversity among leadership and an overall failure to address racial issues adequately. These patterns of racial insensitivity had a lasting impact on Lululemon’s corporate structure, prompting calls for change from within and outside the company.
Employee Reactions and Internal Resistance
The “All Lives Matter” incident and other acts of racial insensitivity at Lululemon triggered strong reactions from current and former employees. For many, the events were not only offensive but also indicative of deeper issues within the company’s corporate culture.
Several employees, especially those from Black, Indigenous, or other marginalized communities, felt deeply troubled by the company’s handling of these situations. Some described feelings of exclusion and alienation, noting that Lululemon’s public image of inclusivity did not align with their experiences behind the scenes. The attempt to push “all lives matter” onto the homepage was particularly jarring for employees who understood the phrase’s implications during a time when racial justice and the Black Lives Matter movement were gaining momentum.
Internally, employees expressed resistance to these incidents and began speaking out against racial insensitivity. In response to the “All Lives Matter” incident, a copywriter who had previously left Lululemon felt compelled to send an email to top executives, demanding accountability and urging the removal of the director who made the controversial suggestion. The backlash ultimately led to the director’s resignation, but not before the incident had caused considerable harm to employee morale and trust in the company’s leadership.
Employee resistance also extended to other aspects of the company’s corporate culture. Lululemon’s innovation division, known as “White Space,” came under scrutiny for its lack of diversity and the problematic connotations of its name. Efforts to address these issues were met with resistance from some members of the leadership, reinforcing the sense that change would be slow to come.
Efforts to Address Diversity and Inclusion
Following the incidents, Lululemon took steps to address racial insensitivity and improve diversity and inclusion within the company. The company’s leadership recognized the need for change, especially in response to growing public pressure and internal employee demands for a more inclusive workplace.
One of Lululemon’s first major initiatives was hiring Stacia Jones, a former chief diversity and inclusion officer at Abercrombie & Fitch, to lead its diversity efforts. Under Jones’s leadership, Lululemon launched several initiatives to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion. These included the expansion of employee resource groups, which provided support for underrepresented employees, and the establishment of financial commitments to fund diversity programs.
Lululemon also conducted its first employee demographic survey to gather data on the diversity of its workforce. The company established four advisory committees with executive and senior leadership to advance progress on diversity and inclusion, and CEO Calvin McDonald began hosting listening sessions with employees who are Black, Indigenous, and people of color. Additionally, Lululemon allocated a budget of $5 million for diversity and inclusion efforts, signaling a commitment to invest in meaningful change.
Despite these efforts, many employees remained skeptical about the company’s commitment to diversity and inclusion. Some described the initiatives as performative, suggesting that they were driven more by public relations concerns than a genuine desire to create a more inclusive workplace. The lack of diverse leadership at the executive level and ongoing incidents of racial insensitivity contributed to this skepticism.
To truly foster an inclusive workplace, Lululemon would need to address systemic issues and ensure that diversity and inclusion efforts were not just symbolic gestures. This would require a comprehensive approach, including diverse representation at all levels of the company, ongoing training and education on racial sensitivity, and a commitment to rooting out institutional biases.
The company’s journey toward diversity and inclusion was far from complete, with much work still to be done to bridge the gap between Lululemon’s public image and the experiences of its employees.
Employee Skepticism and Criticism
Despite Lululemon’s efforts to improve diversity and inclusion, many employees remained skeptical about the company’s commitment to real change. The perception that Lululemon’s initiatives were more performative than substantive persisted among employees, both current and former.
Some employees criticized the company’s approach, suggesting that its efforts were largely reactive, driven by public relations concerns rather than a genuine desire for transformation. The lack of diverse leadership at the executive level reinforced these sentiments, with few people of color in positions of power or influence. This gap raised questions about the company’s ability to truly address systemic issues and create a more inclusive workplace culture.
Allegations of tokenism and performative activism surfaced, with employees expressing frustration at the superficial nature of Lululemon’s diversity and inclusion initiatives. The company’s rapid response to the backlash from the “All Lives Matter” incident, while necessary, seemed more like damage control than a sustained effort to address underlying issues.
Critics called for more tangible changes within the company’s executive ranks and a more comprehensive approach to diversity and inclusion. These calls included increasing the representation of people of color in leadership positions, conducting regular diversity training, and establishing clear policies to address racial insensitivity and discrimination.
Looking Ahead
To address racial insensitivity and foster a genuinely inclusive culture, Lululemon must take significant steps toward systemic change. This process involves re-evaluating company policies, improving diversity at all levels, and creating an environment where employees feel safe and valued.
Key steps Lululemon can take include:
- Diversifying Leadership: Increasing representation among executives and senior leaders to ensure a more inclusive decision-making process.
- Regular Diversity Training: Conducting ongoing training sessions on racial sensitivity, unconscious bias, and inclusive practices to create awareness among employees.
- Accountability Measures: Implementing clear policies and mechanisms for reporting and addressing racial insensitivity, with transparent consequences for violations.
- Employee Resource Groups: Supporting and expanding these groups to provide a platform for underrepresented employees to voice their concerns and share experiences.
- Community Engagement: Strengthening connections with diverse communities and organizations to reflect a broader range of perspectives.
The broader implications of Lululemon’s experience resonate throughout the retail and apparel industry. Other companies can learn from Lululemon’s missteps and successes, recognizing the importance of a genuine commitment to diversity and inclusion. Companies that fail to address racial insensitivity risk damaging their reputation and losing the trust of employees and customers.
Conclusion
The events at Lululemon underscore the importance of a sustained commitment to diversity and inclusion. While the company has taken steps to address racial insensitivity, much work remains to be done to create a truly inclusive workplace. The journey toward inclusivity requires ongoing efforts, accountability, and a willingness to listen to employees’ concerns.
To move forward, Lululemon must embrace a culture of diversity and respect, ensuring that all employees feel valued and heard. This transformation cannot be superficial; it must be ingrained in the company’s values, policies, and practices. By fostering a genuinely inclusive environment, Lululemon can set an example for other companies and contribute to a more equitable and just society.
Add comment