Shouldn't we aim for quality rather than diversity?

[Anonymous]

Shouldn't the most eligible ones be choosen rather than trying to take in more women or people of different ethnicities?

My point is that the one who is the most eligible should be choosen or hired whatever gender or race they are?
And if we do the same and the percentage of men just comes out to be higher then why is that patriarchy?~41

[Logan-5]

There are fields that are lopsided in representation, and because they are, strong talent from non-traditional demographics are less likely to apply. So it's a matter of how deep the talent pool is.

Also, stereotype threat arises when a member of the field from a non-traditional demographic misconstrues the predictable frustrations of the field as an additional sign that one doesn't belong there. With more representatives from one's own background present, this erroneous conclusion is less likely among underrepresented demographics, thus reducing the inefficiency of baseless departures.

Furthermore, while some fields entail monastic work or little interaction, the work in other fields suffers when a member of a traditionally underrepresented group is isolated or not assured that the lopsided demographics means nothing as to the other team members' approachability. The less one feels or is treated like an interloper, the less likely errors caused by lack of communication are made.

As for diversity of intelligence, intelligent people often don't get hired because they wouldn't fit in, it's assumed they'd be easily bored, or the boss would feel threatened for his own job. Intelligent people often don't consider an occupation because they fear they'd have nobody as intelligent as them to relate to. One police department was in the news recently for excluding a candidate because his IQ was 120--which doesn't even get a person into Mensa! Broadening the diversity at a workplace in terms of intelligence would be a step toward other talent considering a workplace that they otherwise wouldn't have.

[NamerOfStars]

Of course. Meritocracy- it's what's for dinner. If you're concerned about race or sex muddling people's perceptions, then anonymize the hiring process- do it by number, rather than name, and avoid direct identifying interaction until a decision is made.

The... New York Philharmonic, I think it was? tried that at one point, as they were facing criticism that they didn't have enough women, and that this must be the result of sexism. Well, you don't need to see or talk to someone to know how well they can play, so they listened in another room and hired the best performers. The proportion of women players in their membership consequently plummeted, and so they shamefacedly abandoned the policy, on the grounds that "the resulting orchestra didn't look like New York" (or wherever it was), because that's TOTALLY what you look for in an orchestra, right? How it LOOKS?

Note also that it's only the high-earning, high-status jobs where this comes up; nobody calls for more "women and minorities" (which, between them, are literally the entire species) among ditch diggers or sewer workers.

Performance matters. Capability matters. Race and sex do not.

[jennifer_bloom]

The theory of affirmative action, is not to lower requirements for minority races, the theory is to prevent qualified minority candidates from being rejected for jobs they are able to do due to personal biases by employers. The ones who invented this practice of affirmative action, assumed that the intellectual skills and academic abilities of minority races would equal those of all other groups once systematic racism was no longer applied to them by employers with racial bias. In practice, this theory has not yet produced the desired result because the culture of rap and hip hop and t. v. still keeps minority groups enslaved in social archetype that hinders and punishes ambitious behaviour or personal domestic sacrifice by their collective social demographic which feeds on the limited social options given to them by music and media culture.

[Asker]

Yeah that's what I'm saying too
If He/She is eligible then hire whatever race or gender or whatever they are.. Equality!

[Anonymous]

Yes, of course. But it is not the woke thing to do.

[Static_In_The_Attic]

Aiming for nothing less than the best was a past practice & nowadays aiming for diversity is what so many places are doing or are forced to do. As for schools unfortunately some the students with all good grades are getting bypassed so schools can pave the way & maintain diversity on their campuses by accepting anyone else. As for employers they’re doing the same so the next time you fly on a plane ask yourself would you rather a qualified pilot with past experience or an individual that was hired off the streets through a diversity program. Who needs qualifications anymore anyway?

[BoopBoopBeep]

Funny, when I needed reconstructive surgery I didn't stop and say "no I don't feel represented by the principle actors in this room performing the operation" I just wanted the best plastic surgeon. The doc that took the bullet out of my leg? Didn't look like me. Didn't care.

Diversity does not improve objective metrics and I don't care about your feelings of "being represented" when there's something that actually matters on the line.

[Sober_Irishman]

Quality. The best person for the job. I don't care if it's a man or woman, or what color their skin is, or their sexuality or what gender they've invented to call themselves. I don't care. Can they do the job? Are they qualified? Skills. . . that's it.

[SolitarySolace]

Hire those who actual my know what they’re doing. Otherwise we will have more dangerous planes and conspiracy of large ships destroying major port bridges which kills people because those operating said ships don’t know what they’re doing they’re just there because they’re DEI hires.

[The_Sexpert]

I honestly hate when standards and difficulty is lowered for women

That not only affects quality of the force, but I think it's an insult to women...

[DextroShade]

What happens when you hire and promote based on merit is you get a lot of White, Asian, and Jewish men and fewer blacks, Hispanics, women, and trannies. The underrepresented groups then scream racism instead taking accountability so you get stupid shit like affirmative action and DEI.

[exitseven]

Yes, making different rules for different groups is not fair.

[Dargil]

Yes, but it is easier to feign victimhood and position yourself for entitlements.

[Pohjolan]

Well duh. I don't want my surgeon or pilot to be hired for other reasons than how well they do their job.

[RedInnocent69]

Why do you think they’re mutually exclusive? Diversity contributes to quality.

[Asker]

No sir I disagree
If someone hires a woman just because she is a woman... in place of hiring a man who was more eligible than her.. then they sure contributed to diversity but sacrificed quality..

[RedInnocent69]

You’re wrong. Eligible is more art than science. Hiring always comes down to bias.

[IslaTheWitch]

no... believe me hiring a girl on technical position when she doesn't meet minimal requirements only to hit 35% of female workers in the department doesn't contribute to quality at all...

[IslaTheWitch]

And at the same moment we reject a guy with 10 years of experience...

[RedInnocent69]

Never at the expense of bona fide occupational requirements.

[IslaTheWitch]

It's what has happened in software houses for the last 7 years...

[GuyAnswersGirls123]

Eligibility isn't binary for a lot of professions, especially skilled profession like what Isla is talking about. It's not like you meet this basic standard or not. It's how much you surpass the standard. There are no cases where inclusivity is a factor in those cases because someone will always be marginally or substantially better whether that person is white, black, male, or female.

[GuyAnswersGirls123]

If you want the best possible people on your team, you don't care about any of this. You just want the best no matter whether they're white, black, green, or blue. You just want the best people on your team. If you care about DEI, then you don't care about this. There is no way to care about both.

[GuyAnswersGirls123]

Besides that, it's discriminatory as hell. Say some team wants to hire me to offer some "Asian" experience. They're conflating Japanese now with Korean, Chinese, Vietnamese, Thai, Indonesian, Filipino, Taiwanese, etc? And I'm not even pure Japanese. I'm half-white and half-American. Does that put me in a special category now of diversity? You put me in a room full of these people and expect me to be the same? I'll be like, "Uhh... so you guys like rice?" Now you're making me an asshole.

We should be striving to evaluate individuals. Why are we doing this bass ackwards Hitler-level bullshit assuming all Asians are the same like Indonesians and Japanese are the same let alone that all Japanese are the same (already bad enough), that all Scottish and Irish are the same, Jamaicans and Nigerans, Colombians and Mexicans, etc, that all men are the same, that all women are the same, You can't accommodate for this type of superficial bullshit diversity without exploding.

You aren't hiring a representative for the entire black race when you hire a black person. This is seriously bullshit and it's so hypocritical coming from people who claim to champion minority rights.

[KostasKouvalis]

Sounds like common sense to ME

[SolitarySolace]

Yes, something that people are severely lacking

[FunkyMonkee]

Yeeeeeeees!

[jahaims]

Duh.