I often have this discussion about DEI on this platform, and someone always responds with, “That’s not how it’s supposed to work.” And you’re right, but what happens in practice and what happens on paper are two completely separate things.
The bottom line is that these lower to mid level employees are given a list of criteria and very little training in DEI itself. They’re then required to fill these slots so it looks like the company is making progress, when in reality it’s very likely they’re hiring someone underqualified.
It’s true that many companies implementing DEI have seen an increase in profit margins, but I think that’s happening because DEI pushes back against nepotism—which, in my opinion, is significantly worse than hiring someone who may be slightly underqualified.
I often have this discussion about DEI on this platform, and someone always responds with, “That’s not how it’s supposed to work.” And you’re right, but what happens in practice and what happens on paper are two completely separate things.
The bottom line is that these lower to mid level employees are given a list of criteria and very little training in DEI itself. They’re then required to fill these slots so it looks like the company is making progress, when in reality it’s very likely they’re hiring someone underqualified.
It’s true that many companies implementing DEI have seen an increase in profit margins, but I think that’s happening because DEI pushes back against nepotism—which, in my opinion, is significantly worse than hiring someone who may be slightly underqualified.