Was thinking about this from a mathematical sense:
Let's say you start with a hiring group of 10 talented analysts and back in the day, you have 4 nepo babies enter the pool as well.
Not great but not a huge issue. You still hire 6 top bucket analysts and the 4 nepos replace the bottom bucket analysts.
Now introduce 3 DEI analysts. So now, you have 3 DEI analysts take the bottom bucket position, 4 nepos taking some top bucket positions and only 3 talent alone analysts are left.
You can see why people in that small group of 3 talented folks are getting irritated and are blaming DEI. But what gets missed in this debate is the role of the nepos.
If DEI just took 3 spots from the bottom bucket pool, it wouldn't be that big of a deal. But when 3 spots go to DEI and another 4 spots go to nepos, regular applicants feel really really squeezed. In a sense, DEI makes each spot that a nepo takes that much more harmful to the hiring pool as you're no longer taking a bottom bucket spot but are turning away really good applicants.
In a perfect world, you might cut down on the nepos since you have to hire DEI but I just don't see that happening.
Note: Not saying the above perfectly describes the real world but think that it is a helpful tool to think about what is happening here.
do u guys just not understand intersectionality. DEI candidates can be both nepo and talent candidates. Nepo candidates can also be talent candidates.
Very often the Nepo candidates are just as talented as anyone else and the same with the DEI candidates.
Yes, agree. However, the above is just a mathematical way of thinking through the problem. I'm not making a definitive description of all cases and all combinations.
This perspective highlights a critical tension in hiring practices, particularly in competitive industries like finance or real estate. Based on the most insightful WSO threads, here's the breakdown of the issue:
Nepotism's Impact: Nepotism has long been a factor in hiring, often prioritizing connections over merit. This creates a scenario where talented candidates are already competing for fewer spots, as nepotism fills positions that might otherwise go to high-performing applicants.
DEI's Role: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives aim to address historical inequities by creating opportunities for underrepresented groups. However, when DEI hiring is layered on top of nepotism, it can exacerbate the perception of limited opportunities for "merit-based" candidates. This is not because DEI itself is inherently problematic, but because nepotism remains unchecked, compounding the issue.
The Real Problem: The frustration often directed at DEI is misplaced. As you pointed out, the real issue lies in the persistence of nepotism. If nepotism were reduced, the integration of DEI candidates would likely feel less contentious, as the overall talent pool would remain robust and merit-driven.
A Balanced Approach: In an ideal scenario, companies would:
Perception vs. Reality: It's also worth noting that the perception of DEI "taking spots" can sometimes be overstated. Many DEI candidates are highly qualified and bring unique perspectives that enhance team performance. The narrative that DEI candidates are inherently less talented is both unfair and inaccurate.
Ultimately, the key to resolving this tension lies in addressing nepotism and ensuring that all hiring practices—whether for DEI or otherwise—are transparent, fair, and merit-driven.
Sources: https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/real-estate/diversity-in-cre?customgpt=1, What is so meritocratic about IB ?, Diversity problem in CRE, Recommendation to abuse diversity programs., Just heard from hr friend my bb's diversity hiring programs already being axxed
debating fairness is a waste of time.
the only counter to biological nepotism is artificial nepotism.
network until you become "family" to the md. build the bond they get for free.
stop trying to win the lottery. build your own side door
Consequuntur doloremque suscipit nobis qui. Explicabo dicta voluptatem nam nostrum. Eaque veniam quis occaecati sit.
Et facere exercitationem voluptas. Inventore perspiciatis sit rem totam expedita ea mollitia. Ex suscipit ex velit debitis rem. Eveniet libero similique quia repellendus sit et repellendus voluptatem.
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...