Anyone Else Sick of Diversity?
There was a pretty hot post on here a while back debating the cons and (lack of) pros of diversity hiring in IB. Not looking to get a repeat of that thread here, but does anyone else feel like every other thread here is about something for diversity only candidates? Really feels shitty that I-banks are bending over backward to give offers out to (often) underqualified candidates just because of the color of their skin (racism) or their gender (sexism).
P.S Thoughts on saying that I'm 12.5% Hispanic as a white guy?
Deleted
it says a lot more about you that you're willing to throw this type of trash out on the board yet way too shook to stand by it with your own identity, I.e., posting anonymously.
Biodiverse populations are stronger, adapt more quickly to changing environments and circumstances, and tend to generally survive longer than homogeneous populations. The same logic very easily applies and can be extrapolated to companies and workforces.
So, no.
Lol. Comparing animal ecosystems to human societies is laughable. I didn't realize that the different types of anole lizards also had conflicting cultures that lead to chaos in their lizard societies.
This isn't actually true. Research shows that diverse work groups have higher conflict rates and have more trouble working together, which honestly should be common sense. However, having different perspectives certainly helps when tackling a problem. The issue with diversity programs at large is the factors used to determine what exactly constitutes diversity. Black/Hispanic are considered "diverse" races. But what about Armenians, Egyptians, and other such races? What makes these races "non-diverse'? Not to mention there are several other factors. In terms of finance I would argue the social economic factor would be of importance as well, When designing trading strategies those from a poorer background would take a more risk-adverse approach as opposed to someone who doesn't know the value of money as much. Of course I've only discussed 2 factors. There are many other factors (supportive/abusive household, health problems, insecurities, etc.) that we could go on about that would fall under the umbrella of "diversity." Needless to say diversity is a much more complex topic then such programs make it appear.
This is correct and incorrect. For simpler tasks, a less diverse group is preferable. For more complex tasks, a more diverse group is preferable. If you'd like, I can find the sources...
That's not really true. It says much more about my "opponents".
For reference, google the guy at google who was fired and publicly shamed for pushing for diversity of thought.
This is the first thing that popped up: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/01/lawsuit-goes-after-alleged-…
Pushing non-diverse thought is not diverse thought lol.
Fucking prospects on this website
Diversity is negatively correlated with social cohesion and destroys trust in societies: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/ and over: https://www.ft.com/content/c4ac4a74-570f-11db-9110-0000779e2340#axzz24H… and over: https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/93/3/1211/2332107 and over: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/juaf.12015 and over: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335924797_Ethnic_Diversity_and… and over: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1369183X.2018.1490638 even in Swedish: https://www.forskning.se/2017/05/18/den-sociala-sammanhallningen-fortsa… and over: https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/immigration-d…
The least diverse societies are in East Asia, Japan, Korea (both) followed by Scandinavia. The most diverse societies are Nigeria, Syria and South Africa. Your claim is unsubstantiated by the totality of human history.
Quit being a pussy and work harder
Yeah this is the same exact thread as before. How about you stop making excuses for why you haven't gotten an offer? Earn it just like everyone else and stop promoting the fallacy that diversity candidates are "often" underqualified just to make yourself feel better about your own setbacks.
I'm non-diversity and have been struggling to get an offer so far but I'm not going around blaming diversity programs. You'll get an offer if you deserve it (most of the time) and if you deserve it but didn't get one then it's still not accurate to blame diversity candidates.
If there isn't a different standard, then how come there are different recruitment processes?
No!
"Networking" conferences, where interviews/superdays are given to anyone that isn't a white or asian male, are entirely fair and not at all racist! Do you really think that these accelerated recruitment processes that serve only women and certain ethnic groups, lower the bar for technicals, and give quotas are unfair?
Well then suck it up, privileged white male. Yes, you read this right. You're the privileged one!
/sarcasm
Non URM minority here and this post is useless. Sure, diversity hires have advantages through pipelines or programs but it isn't taking away your shot at IB unless you play the victim/blame game. Diversity hires do not make up the majority of hires and vary in quality just like any other hire so I am not even sure why we need to start another thread.
Yes litquidity posted a diversity story with Rich Handler but it isn't that serious. I think you need to self reflect and start to look into stoicism or meditation before you begin to develop a cynical mindset to not only finance but to life.
There have been studies that show systematic bias towards those with a "name of color" or "women" so to speak. The best solution imo is to get rid of the name before passing it along to those who review resumes. Otherwise, keep the process normal (nobody gets accelerated).
As someone who is a URM, I think diversity recruiting is BS. The type of "diverse" candidates that end up getting offers usually come from upper middle class or wealthy backgrounds anyways. IMO, the students who are at a real disadvantage are those who are first generation college students and those on the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum. There is no reason why a poor Asian kid should be more disadvantaged than a wealthy Hispanic kid from Long Island.
I never post in this forum but I will make an exception. This is absolutely true. Those programs are bullshit for the exact reason you mentioned. I am a Hispanic, newcomer, single mom household, did not know English a decade ago, immigrants parents, first-generation, etc. And still, I am compared with all the kids that went to the bilingual private schools in Latin America. In other words, it is just the same bullshit. In my opinion, those programs should not even exist at all. They just make a bunch of middle-aged women feel better about themselves.
For the guy who wrote the post, the only thing I would advise is to shut up, look down and work harder like everyone else in North America. People playing the victim's game will get fucked sooner or later.
Saludos
this post is giving off some real beta energy
Good chance the Supreme Court bans race in college admissions at least with the Harvard case in the likely event it makes it to then.
Maybe for public schools. Hard to believe that will happen at schools like Harvard though
Well 98% of schools aren't Harvard or Harvard like, and even then, I'm not sure they'd be super into it if it was made illegal. It would open them up to countless lawsuits, but what do I know.
Hell Berkeley doesn't do it ever since it was made illegal in California, and you can see from their enrollment numbers that they haven't figured out how to get around that.
URM Female here, and I don't speak for every URM/woman but just my 2c.
I've gained so much from diversity programs, including meeting others from similar backgrounds (low socioeconomic, immigrant, etc). Normal networking events are great, but when 15/20 analysts have a specific background that doesn't match yours, it's harder to connect on a significant level.
These events also give exposure to VPs/MDs who are URM/Women. It's nice to see someone who looks like you reach a certain level of success in this field, and gives me role models to look up to. "If they can do it, I can too." It's subtle, but these women are people who I think about (or even reach out to) when I come across something difficult/challenging in my work.
Certain things discussed in diversity events are also mostly applicable to that group. Some panels feature working moms, helping women think about how they can both have kids and progress in their career. Others talk about what outfits to wear for interviews/jobs/office social events, etc. Might seem minimal but I've found it hard to decode "semi-formal" vs. "business-formal" vs. "social attire" in different scenarios. This is information that is hard to access otherwise, while for non-URM/Females, given the make-up of most offices, it is pretty easy to access/openly talked about.
Regarding interviews, qualitatively, I've been asked questions that were exactly the same as when I interviewed the normal rounds at comparable banks. At one MM boutique, I got 1 out of 15 technicals wrong in the first round, and wasn't given a superday. It's naive to blanketedly state that "diversity interviews" are any harder or easier without having experienced them or actually having data.
I agree there are gaps to diversity programs, but I don't think the shortcomings are significant enough to justify axing them. A better way to judge could be looking at socio-econ background and access to resources, but that can get intrusive and hard to judge on a large scale. The idea is URMs typically have fewer access to resources, and despite a few rich URMs getting access to them, this is still the best standing way to vet applicants.
I realize if you're posting on this thread, you're not likely to shift your opinion. If anyone takes issue with any of my points and wants a constructive conversation, I'm happy to discuss.
You mention poor socioeconomic backgrounds. I’m sure you realize one of the shortcomings of these programs is that they do nothing for low income or first gen white/asian guys.
I absolutely realize that, and yes it is an issue - I agree, and it should be addressed. But I don't think that's the reason to hate on diversity programs as a whole because there are some valid outcomes for other groups that come out of it.
Say we end these programs completely because they don't reach low socio-economic Asian/White males. I think that is a net negative overall - because nobody who needs access to resources is addressed.
What do you think might be a solution to address low socioeconomic non-URM males? Maybe Questbridge scholarship-type programs might be an interesting model to look at?
How do you view white women in these programs? I think diversity is great but it seems backwards to allow white women to benefit from a program that is designed for mostly women racial minorities.
Honestly, it is at times difficult to see white women with parent(s) in banking/privileged backgrounds also participating because I know they have advantages that I don't. Though, there are some disadvantages all women face in recruitment/the job; these programs help design cohorts of women to support each other in the future.
However, at the end of the day it's really hard to exactly reach the minority demographic so I am just grateful these programs have given those like myself opportunities to learn about banking.
I know JPM (and some other BBs) did programs only for URM Women. I think that might be a helping step.
What's your viewpoint?
Growing up middle class and attending a non-target, I can tell you that those 15/20 guys don't fit my profile either. But because I'm male and not a 'diverse' race I don't get any sort of support and I'll be the awkward one out. What makes you think you deserve such help that others in different backgrounds can never obtain?
I did not say that I deserve it, and you don't. You say you can't relate to the majority of people at networking events, but by what magnitude? I am not the judge of who deserves help and who doesn't -- all I am saying is just because some groups aren't able to be represented, it doesn't mean all diversity programs need to be scrapped; they oftentimes help the most marginalized groups.
I am glad you asked this. I am fucking SICK of seeing rainbows everywhere I turn and the only silver lining of this lockdown is that the filth-ridden parade will not be taking place, which in London seems to last the whole month of June. NEVER has there been a more celebrated minority group that wants to FORCE you to accept their lifestyle and change the laws of nature such as child rearing and society laws such as marriage, irrespective of religious or philosophical beliefs. Investment banks have NO business putting rainbows on their branding. FFS
Flip it around, imagine being gay when being straight is the norm and in your face from the movies you watch and the people you see in the streets. Take a step back man and understand how important it is for gay people to finally come out of the closet after years of homophobia, discrimination and violence. There is still a lot of homophobia in the world and you don't have to agree with who they are or what they like but don't be hinderence to their success of gaining more awareness because it doesn't fit your personal view.
They aren't forcing you unless you want to become bi or gay then they can't do make you do anything. Most gay people are normal people who don't talk different from the norm and dress similar to every straight person but the crazy minority makes a bad scene and now there is a misconception.
I don’t give a fuck about any issues the LGBT may face. I stand by my post. Rainbows have no place in IB branding or even in mainstream society. You can not even buy a coffee without having LGBT agenda shoved down your throat in the branding of the paper cup you drink from. Ppl should not have to undermine their religious and philosophical beliefs to make LGBT feel more accepted. No other minority group is as celebrated as LGBT and yet ppl only ever talk about women and ethnic minorities in the diversity debate.
I am ok with diversity but I am not ok with the current diversity mechanism.
Current diversify schemes are looking for equal outcome rather than equal opportunities.
If there are 200 female and 800 male applying, why should we aim for a 50:50 gender mix in the recruit (i.e. 5 male and 5 female)?
We should equalize such that top x% of male/female (2 female and 8 male) from their cohort is selected.
I am ok to have a slightly higher % of minority being selected (3 female and 7 male), but sometimes the % is skewed up so high that clearly some groups are being significantly easier to get selected.
Also, most diversity is BS. You want to attract women because traditionally they are not interested in banking. Then why are you shortlisting women from diversity schemes that have all worked at "boutique ib" or pwm? LOL?
We should have diversity scheme that allows people who have never explored finance to get a taste of banking. For example, give the software engineer or biologist with 3.8 GPA two week shadowing opportunities in his junior summer. If he is good, let him do online training in his senior year. Then let him have a 4 week internship shortly after his graduation. If he is an IB material, he can join FT directly. If he is bad, he can continue to work as SWE or biologist.
Also, for those who are claiming diversity scheme promotes equalization among different socioeconomic backgrounds, perhaps you should also suggest IBs to form a consortium and have a joint technical knowledge SAT style test. Then those who went to average in-state schools with a 3.9 GPA but lack the opportunity to fly to NY for coffee chat or in-state boutique IB opportunities can access the opportunities as well.
I can buy urm recruiting for Hispanics (non white, not Germans from Argentina), and blacks with a much heavier emphasis on socioeconomic background vs race - both men and women. But I cannot stomach white women receiving any benefit whatsoever. That’s just obscene.
This is some real White American First World Problems bullshit tbh
who ever told you life was fair? the sooner you realize it isn't, the sooner you'll stop making excuses. there are plenty of places to work, quit your bitchin
That's a terrible counterargument. Imagine telling slaves "Life isn't fair, suck it up" 150 years ago. Where would society be today?
the difference is slaves had no choice and this guy can work in plenty of jobs. you can choose to be a victim of your circumstances (supposedly getting shut out solely because of diversity programs) or you can focus on things which you can control (how hard you work, how wide of a net you're casting, your networking efforts, your extracurriculars).
I'm not saying that firms diversity programs are good, I'm saying bitching about something you can't control does you absolutely no good. sorry bro, agree to disagree
Lol the number of dumb girls on my spring weeks who say they are interested in finance but know nothing, always makes you wonder what got them in
The fact that this thread exists and has so much support is really worrying as a woman in IB lol. Will people only think of me as a diversity hire and resent me for it. Sigh
only if you're hot, incompetent, or both. people will always judge, some men are threatened by strong women. forget them, others' perception of your worth should have no affect on your intrinsic value. be comfortable in your own skin, and don't give your superiors any reason to believe you're only there because of your equipment. work product can shut up most misogynists.
Be so good they can't ignore you. Go out there, crush it and provide value to the firm so that everyone knows you deserve to be there and not because of your looks or gender.
Literally just be a normal person. Work hard, be humble, get along well with others. No need to put on a facade as a balls to the wall hard worker just so you can be perceived as hard-working and capable. Authenticity is key. You were hired because they believed in you. If they didn't believe in you, you wouldn't have gotten an offer. Plus, people are thinking about themselves way more than they are thinking about you! Once you accept this, you can focus on yourself and will hopefully have a more positive experience.
Laborum blanditiis et quidem atque fugit accusamus non. Ut quas quo enim.
Qui natus recusandae et soluta ut repellendus explicabo. Alias magni voluptatem quis. Iure itaque ratione consequatur est est magnam. Dolore labore ea quasi velit et reiciendis quia.
Molestias sit aspernatur at. Dolorem aspernatur laboriosam qui ut. Numquam mollitia nobis enim labore expedita velit. Laudantium quaerat provident natus.
Suscipit voluptas odio quis ex quis totam optio. Quam ex quas enim. Distinctio modi perferendis architecto beatae.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Qui eum voluptas vero enim. Et necessitatibus consequatur non id provident et. Sequi est dolores aut rerum enim omnis. Eveniet molestias iste vitae occaecati corrupti delectus libero. Voluptatum repellendus soluta sit incidunt. Asperiores voluptate autem et temporibus aut.
Molestiae id alias facere neque dolores nesciunt harum. Quaerat nemo sit ducimus dolores quos rem.
Qui sequi sit id non quas voluptate accusamus. Ut aut hic sit harum in et enim. Quod sit officiis itaque quia laboriosam nisi. Consequatur explicabo et eaque et.
Sit id est iure omnis aut dicta culpa pariatur. Quas suscipit asperiores reiciendis molestiae sapiente molestiae deleniti. Veniam et fugit est laborum.
Et odio qui hic repudiandae illo sunt. Non esse repellendus excepturi omnis rerum nostrum incidunt.