Diversity Is in the Working Vocabulary. The Specifics Mostly Aren't.
June's data drop is in. For Pride Month, we ran the cleanest comparison the corpus supports: how often each industry's leaders use the general diversity-and-inclusion vocabulary cluster ("diversity," "inclusion," "inclusive," "belonging," "underrepresented") versus how often they use LGBTQ+ specific vocabulary ("LGBT," "LGBTQ," "queer," "Pride Month").
The two don't track together. Most industries that have the general vocabulary fluent and present rarely reach for the identity-specific terms. Only one vertical — Nonprofit & Education — surfaces both at meaningfully higher rates than the rest.
That asymmetry is the diagnostic worth pausing on. The general D&I framework is leadership vocabulary across most industries. The specific identity vocabulary is not.
Go deeper: Explore industry-specific intelligence profiles to see what each vertical's leaders actually surface.
The Vocabulary Counts
The cumulative leadership-corpus mentions of the relevant terms:
| Term | Mentions in interviews |
|---|---|
| Authentic | 5,530 |
| Equity | 4,176 |
| Identity | 3,483 |
| Diversity | 2,822 |
| Inclusion / inclusive | 2,051 |
| Pride | 1,664 |
| Representation | 1,405 |
| DEI | 830 |
| Belonging | 615 |
| Allyship / ally | 558 |
| Underrepresented | 276 |
| LGBT / LGBTQ | 183 |
| Queer | 54 |
Two patterns stand out.
First, the general words dominate. "Diversity" alone (2,822) is fifteen times more common than "LGBTQ" (183). "Inclusion" (2,051) is forty times more common than "queer" (54). The vocabulary that travels easily in leadership interviews is the broad framework. The specific identity vocabulary travels far less.
Second, "DEI" as a labeled framework (830 mentions) is only about one-third as common as the broader "diversity" vocabulary (2,822). The acronym that has dominated corporate-press coverage for the past several years appears in a comparatively small slice of long-form leadership interviews. The general topic is in the working vocabulary. The specific framework label is not.
The General D&I Leaderboard
Per-capita mentions of the general D&I vocabulary cluster — diversity, inclusion, inclusive, belonging, underrepresented — by industry:
| Industry | General D&I pct |
|---|---|
| Nonprofit & Education | 31.78% |
| HR & Staffing | 24.63% |
| Financial Services | 19.23% |
| Retail & Consumer | 18.18% |
| FinTech | 17.59% |
| Professional Services | 16.76% |
| Health Systems & Providers | 15.20% |
| Supply Chain | 13.82% |
| Food & Hospitality | 13.18% |
| Training & Education | 11.22% |
| Manufacturing | 11.22% |
| Venture Capital & PE | 11.21% |
| Healthcare Services | 10.89% |
| AI / SaaS | 10.30% |
Nonprofit & Education leads — the mission-driven sector that has the most professionally established D&I vocabulary. HR & Staffing is second, predictably, since the function exists in part to operationalize workforce diversity programs.
Financial Services, Retail & Consumer, and FinTech cluster in the 17–20% range. These are industries with material consumer-facing accountability and visible workforce metrics. The vocabulary is part of how leaders discuss talent, audience, and brand positioning.
The bottom of the leaderboard is where AI/SaaS and the broader technology industries sit. AI/SaaS at 10.30% has the lowest D&I vocabulary rate of any vertical we measure. The tech industries that have spent the past decade publicly committing to diversity initiatives talk about diversity, inclusion, and belonging in leadership interviews at roughly one-third the rate of nonprofit and education leaders.
The LGBTQ+ Specific Leaderboard
Per-capita mentions of LGBTQ+ specific vocabulary — LGBT, LGBTQ, queer, Pride Month — by industry:
| Industry | LGBT pct |
|---|---|
| Nonprofit & Education | 5.04% |
| Healthcare Services | 1.78% |
| HR & Staffing | 1.71% |
| FinTech | 1.54% |
| Retail & Consumer | 1.30% |
| Financial Services | 1.18% |
| Food & Hospitality | 0.85% |
| Professional Services | 0.83% |
| Health Systems & Providers | 0.80% |
| Venture Capital & PE | 0.75% |
| Training & Education | 0.73% |
| AI / SaaS | 0.50% |
| Supply Chain | 0.36% |
| Manufacturing | 0.20% |
Nonprofit & Education is again the leader, this time at a much wider margin. At 5.04%, the sector references LGBTQ+ identity vocabulary roughly three times more often than the next-highest industry. The mission overlap is the reason: nonprofit and education organizations frequently include LGBTQ+ community services, advocacy, and educational programming directly in their work.
The drop after Nonprofit & Education is steep. Healthcare Services (1.78%), HR & Staffing (1.71%), and FinTech (1.54%) sit roughly tied in second through fourth place. From there, almost every other industry sits below 1%. Manufacturing (0.20%) and Supply Chain (0.36%) barely register on the specific identity vocabulary.
The Gap Between General and Specific
The comparison between the two leaderboards is the most diagnostic part of the data.
| Industry | General D&I pct | LGBT pct | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nonprofit & Education | 31.78% | 5.04% | 6.3:1 |
| HR & Staffing | 24.63% | 1.71% | 14.4:1 |
| Financial Services | 19.23% | 1.18% | 16.3:1 |
| FinTech | 17.59% | 1.54% | 11.4:1 |
| Retail & Consumer | 18.18% | 1.30% | 14.0:1 |
| Professional Services | 16.76% | 0.83% | 20.2:1 |
| Manufacturing | 11.22% | 0.20% | 56.1:1 |
| Supply Chain | 13.82% | 0.36% | 38.4:1 |
| AI / SaaS | 10.30% | 0.50% | 20.6:1 |
The ratio matters. Nonprofit & Education uses general D&I vocabulary 6.3 times more often than LGBTQ+ specific vocabulary. That's the lowest ratio — meaning the sector with the most general vocabulary also has the smallest gap to the specifics. The general and the specific travel together.
Most other industries have ratios in the 14–20 range. The general vocabulary is fifteen times more common than the specific. Leaders are reaching for "diversity" and "inclusion" much more often than they're reaching for the specific identity vocabulary those frameworks were originally designed to surface.
Manufacturing and Supply Chain have the widest ratios — 56:1 and 38:1 respectively. Both industries surface the general framework at meaningful rates but rarely reach for the specifics.
What the Vocabulary Pattern Reveals
The cleanest read is that general D&I vocabulary has become part of professional leadership language in a way that specific identity vocabulary has not. The broad framework is safely deployable in most corporate contexts; the specific terms carry more political weight and are deployed more selectively.
That's not a moral observation. It's a vocabulary observation, and it's useful for anyone trying to understand how to talk about these topics with a particular buyer.
A leader who uses the general framework consistently is signaling professional fluency in the topic. A leader who uses both the general and the specific is signaling lived professional engagement with LGBTQ+ communities specifically — most commonly because their work intersects with those communities directly. The industries where that second pattern is most common are the ones where the work overlaps: nonprofit and education (community services), healthcare services (clinical care), HR & staffing (workforce policy).
The industries where the second pattern is rarest are the ones where the work doesn't structurally intersect. Manufacturing, Supply Chain, and AI/SaaS leaders use the general framework but not the specifics — not because of unwillingness, but because the specifics aren't part of the working leadership conversation in those verticals.
What This Means for Pride Month Communications
If your team is producing Pride Month content or communications, the data offers a useful calibration.
If you operate in Nonprofit & Education or Healthcare Services, your buyer is fluent in both the general and the specific vocabulary. Communications can deploy LGBTQ+ identity vocabulary directly without explanation. The audience will recognize the register as appropriate.
If you operate in HR & Staffing, FinTech, Financial Services, or Retail & Consumer, your buyer has the general framework fluent but reaches for the specific vocabulary at lower rates. Pride Month communications can deploy both, but the specifics carry more weight than they would in nonprofit communications — meaning intentionality matters more.
If you operate in Manufacturing, Supply Chain, Tech/SaaS, or AI/SaaS, your buyer has the general framework available but rarely reaches for the specific vocabulary in their working leadership conversation. Pride communications in these verticals will be entering a relative vocabulary vacuum — neither bad nor good, but informationally different from communications into industries where the vocabulary is already in the buyer's regular use.
The data doesn't tell anyone what to say. It just shows what's been said. Happy Pride Month to the leaders in the corpus who carried the specific vocabulary into their interviews — and to the people whose lives the vocabulary represents.