When they have connections based on a privileged upbringing so they should be considered first like a true american instead of those people who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps.
My experience is that if DEI hiring ends in a bad hire, that the organization at large was likely going to do a bad hire anyway. Some people might find it easier to blame DEI, but the truth is that your leadership sucks at your business. DEI is a scapegoat.
For example, people were jumping up and down at Boeing’s mission statement including DEI and pinning all their woes on that. Except the severe mistakes were made before that mission statement, and a more clear line can be drawn from how McDonnell Douglas leadership failed, got slurped up into Boeing, and ultimately somehow got to call the shots at Boeing.
Hollow, insincere self congratulation around DEI was a common feature of bad leadership, but it’s not the cause of the problems. Plenty of successful companies with solid hiring also have DEI initiatives without detriment.
You bring up a very good point that the industry itself might be flawed.
The issue for me—and the reason I made my original statement—is that we can’t curtail human nature. By its nature, considering DEI aspects in hiring can potentially taint the criteria by which candidates are selected.
I’m not saying that cronyism and nepotism aren’t very real and serious issues across various industries and countries. However, DEI feels like a similar practice—just framed differently. It leads companies to hire a specific type of person for the wrong reasons rather than hiring the right person for the right reasons.
Moreover, in the U.S., only about 43% of the population is non-white. That means that, on any given job application, roughly 50% of the applicants are likely to be white. If a large business has an employee pool that is significantly more than 50% non-white, that suggests the industry is hiring with a specific demographic in mind—not based on merit, but based on ethnicity, appearance, or political beliefs. I think we can both agree that, in most industries, those factors should not be relevant.
nature. By its nature, considering DEI aspects in hiring can potentially taint the criteria by which candidates are selected.
Still an organizational problem if people are hired without regard to merit. In fact that’s the whole reason it’s worth having a DEI focus : you can’t just hire on demographics and it takes a bit more work to hire on merit while trying to reduce inequity.
If you see people hired solely on demographics, either your impression s wrong or the hiring manager sucks
That’s why whenever I hear people claim someone was a DEI hire they always follow up with a meticulous assessment of their qualifications, awards, interview performance and achievements and they compare them accurately with another applicant that had better qualifications, awards, interview performance and achievements. They don’t simply look at the first non white cis het male in a position of power and scream ‘DEI!!!’ betraying the bigotry that is actually pushing this. No siree.
My concern is that dei hiring practices are curtailing merit based hiring.
I don’t care either way what ones political affiliations are or what one identifys as as long as they’re the best for the job.
(This is simply a critical assessment of the issue and does not reflect any personal views on dei or what some refer to as woke)
It certainly isnt
Yes it is. Dei literally favors diversity over merit.
It pressures people into hiring somebody they otherwise wouldn’t.
No, it doesn’t
What merit based hiring.
When they have connections based on a privileged upbringing so they should be considered first like a true american instead of those people who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps.
Where candidates have amazing credentials and accolades but are terrible at the job.
My experience is that if DEI hiring ends in a bad hire, that the organization at large was likely going to do a bad hire anyway. Some people might find it easier to blame DEI, but the truth is that your leadership sucks at your business. DEI is a scapegoat.
For example, people were jumping up and down at Boeing’s mission statement including DEI and pinning all their woes on that. Except the severe mistakes were made before that mission statement, and a more clear line can be drawn from how McDonnell Douglas leadership failed, got slurped up into Boeing, and ultimately somehow got to call the shots at Boeing.
Hollow, insincere self congratulation around DEI was a common feature of bad leadership, but it’s not the cause of the problems. Plenty of successful companies with solid hiring also have DEI initiatives without detriment.
You bring up a very good point that the industry itself might be flawed.
The issue for me—and the reason I made my original statement—is that we can’t curtail human nature. By its nature, considering DEI aspects in hiring can potentially taint the criteria by which candidates are selected.
I’m not saying that cronyism and nepotism aren’t very real and serious issues across various industries and countries. However, DEI feels like a similar practice—just framed differently. It leads companies to hire a specific type of person for the wrong reasons rather than hiring the right person for the right reasons.
Moreover, in the U.S., only about 43% of the population is non-white. That means that, on any given job application, roughly 50% of the applicants are likely to be white. If a large business has an employee pool that is significantly more than 50% non-white, that suggests the industry is hiring with a specific demographic in mind—not based on merit, but based on ethnicity, appearance, or political beliefs. I think we can both agree that, in most industries, those factors should not be relevant.
Still an organizational problem if people are hired without regard to merit. In fact that’s the whole reason it’s worth having a DEI focus : you can’t just hire on demographics and it takes a bit more work to hire on merit while trying to reduce inequity.
If you see people hired solely on demographics, either your impression s wrong or the hiring manager sucks
That’s why whenever I hear people claim someone was a DEI hire they always follow up with a meticulous assessment of their qualifications, awards, interview performance and achievements and they compare them accurately with another applicant that had better qualifications, awards, interview performance and achievements. They don’t simply look at the first non white cis het male in a position of power and scream ‘DEI!!!’ betraying the bigotry that is actually pushing this. No siree.
I will contend that actually is more or less the case. Considering it is simply human nature to be more lazy than more productive.
If hiring personnel are dictated to hire more on dei then on merit that’s what they’re going to do.
I’m not saying that this is happening industry-wide across an entire population.
I’m just simply stating that it’s a concern that this might be happening.
Then they duck and should be replaced