https://www.dailywire.com/news/microsoft-laid-off…
”True systems-change work associated with DEI programs everywhere are no longer business critical or smart as they were in 2020,” said the email, which was sent to thousands of employees, according to BI.”
I know most of the responses here will just be anti-DEI and diversity hiring in general, but aside from that, I think logically it's completely possible to hire a diverse and inclusive workforce without essentially having a "second HR department," much less a nine-figure second HR department. You can just...make sure to interview diverse candidates.
DEI departments in hindsight seem like an overreaction to an issue that I think exists and a lot of people here problem don't, but an overreaction regardless.
my full thoughts here: https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/off-topic/dei-rant#comment-3437351
one quick clarifying issue, as I don't want to put words in your mouth. what is the issue you think exists?
I ask because I've gotten different response from within my BB's DEI folks: systemic racism (I think this is bullshit particularly in finance), ratios of minority employees being low (mostly an issue of school sourcing rather than racism), lack of mentorship (real issue but also not unique to minorities)
that said, 100% agree on the overreaction
I think that it is human nature to hit it off faster with people who are most similar to you are. As most hiring is based on "vibes" and "who I'd get a beer with" past a certain point, in certain industries where an overwhelming majority of people are from a similar background - whether that's rich kids from Ivy League universities on Wall Street or good ole boys with frat swoops from SEC schools in Southeastern commercial real estate - it creates an insular cycle where someone outside of that in-crowd may be a fantastic candidate for the job but doesn't fit the mold of the narrow office culture at first glance.
I know a lot of people with political views more on my side are more focused on righting historic wrongs or quotas or something, but for me at least, the issue is always access, to information, to the lingo, to mentorship as you mentioned, to the interview table with specific names on their resume, and I think that how you described trying to go about it in the post you linked...
...is exactly the way it should be done, even though doing so left you disillusioned. There is definitely overt sexism and racism alive and well in the business world, but IMO you're not going to solve those edge cases with diversity hiring initiatives or outreach.
What you may accomplish though is inspiring some young high school kid to research an industry he didn't even know existed or had a shot at or you may find out that the lone women on your interview list is a badass even though she doesn't know anything about college football, and unless someone out there is saying "Hey, there are probably social reasons why Black men or women aren't even applying to these jobs, much less getting hired" most people probably wouldn't even think about it because they're primarily focused on their day to day. I think that blind spot is both a disservice to people outside of the in-crowd, and while this one annoys the people on WSO who inherently think a "DEI hire" is someone less intelligent and less capable, I think that you will find absolute gem candidates when you look outside the box.
I agree with you that "Corporate DEI Initiatives" are incredibly cynical, and an entire department dedicated to it is a bit wild (What do they do day to day?) but I think that working toward giving non-traditional candidates more equality of opportunity, even if it doesn't lead to equality of outcome for one reason or another, is only a good thing. It's an untapped market of talent.
It was always just a marketing tool with the added bonus of decreasing the likelihood of workforce unionization. The studies cooked up by McKinsey and other big consultancies raving about the superiority of diverse workforces were riddled with errors, biases, and found to be impossible to replicate or verify. The second it stopped being beneficial and became just another line item cost is the second operators stopped caring. As soon as it becomes a detriment (because it necessitates hiring of subpar talent when implemented at large scale) and/or politically unfavorable, it is jettisoned without a second thought.
If you dig down into that McKinsey "study" it is even more damning. McKinsey basically looked at PAST performance and attributed it to FUTURE actions. I mean it is absolutely wild that anyone trust them to even spell their names right after a logical fallacy of that magnitude.
McKinsey & management consulting in general being a complete crock of shit - the great uniter of the Off Topic forum.
Have a SB
The McKinsey study is so unbelievably faulty that even DEI-proponents have criticized it at length. Extremely biased study. Remember: you can say anything you want with statistics.
Read that article. Also thought it was interesting Microsoft made much more references to D AND I instead of DEI, the latter of which I always though was a nefarious change up (gib money not qualified for, etc).
Not sure if this is indicative of anything broader regarding DEI programs - this one was particularly extraneous (an entire separate HR dept??), but I think a lot of the undergrad DEI pipelines and programs are here to say. Just speaking for myself but I think that’s actually where DEI programs really shine, they bring in a lot of very motivated kids every year
It made some sense back when people were setting entire cities on fire; corporations didn't want to be next in line for protests. Nowadays no one cares and budgets are extremely tight.
Is there DEI in other countries or is this only mainly in the US?
Happens to a few countries in APAC, namely Malaysia and Indonesia around Malaysian/Indonesian Chinese competing against native Malays/Indonesians (the latter being the benefiting majority). Sometimes I wonder if that has anything to do with the oddly high number of Malaysian Twitterers who are super invested in American politics/conservatism.
Also happens in India re: caste system but that's a whole rabbit hole in itself.
Some surprisingly interesting comments here regarding the raw incentives for DEI.
Personally though I still can’t get over that DEI people legitimately believed and cited the McKinsey study that “DEI increases profits 40%.” What an absolutely preposterous implication.
Contrary to what’s said on this platform, I do feel like people outside of finance are smart enough to sniff out numbers that look off.
So this leads me to believe that DEI is initiatives were implemented/preserved to satisfy (a) liberal leaning employee bases or (b) the Democratic administration.
Candidly I think it was just (a). Racial equity was a huge concern within democratic circles in 2020 and with the great resignation at play companies felt the strong need to appease their employee bases.
But with this in mind, this trend is certain to continue.
Importantly, will they continue doing land acknowledgements and describing their race and gender with pronouns when introducing themselves during speaking engagements?
How is this important? Who gives a shit?
Fugit fugiat deleniti harum vel unde repellat magnam. Rem quidem et totam soluta. Est maxime ducimus beatae sed aut eos cumque. Officia rem enim quod sed nihil officia ut deserunt. Dolorem repellat asperiores odio laboriosam.
Consequatur laudantium minima fuga eaque magni rem. Quaerat magnam et neque minus omnis. Corrupti amet assumenda voluptatem quod. Ullam ut impedit vero quo eos. Eos consequatur et eaque quaerat corrupti vitae.
Voluptatem ex nesciunt adipisci consequuntur error. Accusantium beatae incidunt at dolor. Itaque quia aut praesentium.
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...