Board and C-Suite Diversity

With everything going on right now I'm seeing a lot of stuff on TV about how we need more diversity on boards and at the C-Suite level.

I'm not denying that some people may have been overlooked, but I have to believe that's a small fraction. Aren't businesses trying to select the best people to try and put themselves in the best position to be successful? It's hard to run a business, why select less qualified people to be in leadership positions or board positions purely because they're white?

Am I thinking about that correctly or is there something I'm not seeing? I could see it as a grassroots problem, where, if minorities get better education it'll essentially feed up to those levels.

What like to hear everyones thoughts or experiences.

Comments (217)

Most Helpful
Jun 4, 2020

Asians are some of the best educated ppl in America. They consistently outpace their peers as far as test scores and academic achievement go. They are underrepresented on boards and in the C-suite. But yea bro, keep telling me about how this whole corporate game is all a meritocracy, never mind that we consistently acknowledge it's not on this board (networking, office politics, etc.).

So, to answer your question.... yes, less qualified white ppl fill leadership positions and board seats across all of corporate America, because it's a relationship game. They don't call it the good ol' boys club for no reason.

    • 50
    • 8
Jun 4, 2020

It's stunning that there are people who uphold the myth of meritocracy and use it as an excuse for low diversity amongst leaders. Get it out of your head. Meritocracy is for channelling external unfairness as internal failure. Oh, you were passed for promotion, it must be because of intense competition, and definitely not because of a backdoor connection.

Array

    • 8
    • 1
  • Intern in IB-M&A
Jun 4, 2020

Wow, a statement you present where I'm not utterly shocked

    • 1
Jun 4, 2020

But forcing diversity is even worse.

Finance Data Science

    • 5
Jun 4, 2020

Wow, this is the first time I've seen you write coherently without being misinterpreted.

Snarky comments aside, generally speaking, the US is much better at meritocracy than many other nations. Of course, it's different per case. In highly functioning firms, there is virtually no office politics based on "I went to the same school as these guys", "I grew up in the same part of the country as these guys", "you're too young to get promoted", "you haven't worked here long enough to get a raise", etc... I'm not saying that office politics don't exist, but what we have are more preferable than what some other countries have.

Also, you gotta understand that simply less minorities enter the business world. Asian Americans would much rather become high-skill professionals. As a matter of fact, they represent unusually high proportions in medical and technological fields. Indian Americans are similar, but have been dominating the technology space and have been increasingly entering the mainstream business world and finance. I don't need to talk about Jewish Americans of course...

The real unfortunate case is African Americans, who lag behind immensely when it comes to education and opportunities. This is essentially attributed to the history of African-Americans starting from slavery, state-level racism, segregation, etc... whose damages to availability of opportunities still haven't been fully remedied.

But you should know that things are getting better. And forcing diversity is only gonna backfire. Heck it already is backfiring.

Finance Data Science

    • 13
Jun 4, 2020

Because soft skills matter...

    • 4
    • 6
Jun 4, 2020
FutureBankTeller:

Because soft skills matter...

So this is your theory: Soft skills among Asians are so poor that despite them handily outperforming as a population as far as academics they deserve to comprise only ~2% of Fortune 500 CEOs versus being ~5% of the population.

I find that very hard to believe.

They are overrepresented at the lower levels so you believe that so many of them have such poor social skills that by the time you get to the top of the pyramid them being underrepresented is justified...

Ok.

p.s. I am completely ignoring the fact that social skills in corporate America often means being able to successfully navigate, and ingratiating yourself with, dudebro white ppl.

    • 10
    • 1
Jun 5, 2020

agreed! Second that! motion for rule of law.

Array

  • Analyst 1 in IB-M&A
Jun 4, 2020

Do corporate boards in Asia need more diversity?

    • 8
Jun 4, 2020
Analyst 1 in IB-M&A:

Do corporate boards in Asia need more diversity?

Corporate boards in Asia reflect their populous.

    • 6
    • 1
Jun 4, 2020

And this justifies our lack of diversity at the executive level how? Who cares if others countries' boards aren't diverse either? We're more economically developed and should strive to be better.

Array

  • Intern in IB-M&A
Jun 4, 2020

This is fax

  • Prospect in IB - Gen
Jun 4, 2020

Pushing for diversity won't help Asians. Liberals don't consider them diverse because they have a culture that actually encourages success compared to that of for example, blacks. I'm going to get MS for this but growing up low income, I've seen blacks shaming other blacks for trying hard in school etc which is something that just doesn't really happen in Asian culture.

The shit that OP is talking about largely helps unqualified blacks/hispanics/women, similar to the lower standards for hiring in IB for those classes.

    • 6
    • 2
Jun 4, 2020
Prospect in IB - Gen:

The shit that OP is talking about largely helps unqualified blacks/hispanics/women, similar to the lower standards for hiring in IB for those classes.

I won't address the rest of your post, which rushes to many conclusions but.... do you have proof of this?

That is, proof that minority AA hires are less qualified than their white counterparts.

  • Intern in IB-M&A
Jun 4, 2020

You're right about asians. Asians don't see much representation and still take it on the chin. Asians aren't viewed as important in society, this extends into other areas as asian men are never desired and are never viewed as attractive in comparison to their black and white counterparts. The racism and stereotypes that asians face is blatantly obvious but tolerated. The culture is the only reason asians have been able to reach success and even then the bamboo ceiling is real.

Just to got to accept that we aren't viewed as important

    • 2
    • 2
Jun 4, 2020

Find it pointless to compare Asian youth attitudes towards education to a that of low income blacks in the US because the comparison wouldn't stand against African students boarding in France and the UK on their way to Oxbridge, just as it would be an unfair comparing these students to those in the US.

Array

    • 1
Funniest
Jun 5, 2020

i find it very strange to read reasonable takes from someone with a history of dispensing extremely wild, shitty takes

    • 11
Jun 4, 2020
BobTheBaker:

Asians are some of the best educated ppl in America. They consistently outpace their peers as far as test scores and academic achievement go. They are underrepresented on boards and in the C-suite. But yea bro, keep telling me about how this whole corporate game is all a meritocracy, never mind that we consistently acknowledge it's not on this board (networking, office politics, etc.).

So, to answer your question.... yes, less qualified white ppl fill leadership positions and board seats across all of corporate America, because it's a relationship game. They don't call it the good ol' boys club for no reason.

I just can't agree with you for 3 reasons.

1) Education has no causal relationship with becoming a good business person. The skills that take to become C-suite and to sit on boards are vastly different from doing well in school and being well educated. Good education is only correlated with business success, there is no real causality there. Perhaps with the exception of high-skill fields like finance, engineering, and biotech: Incidentally, technology, finance, and biotech have the highest rate of Asian executives compared to other industries.

Good education doesn't mean much when it comes to business acumen, people skills, leadership, and other traits that makes a good business leader. So have Asians overall developed enough those skills? Are they setup to develop such skills? I'd say no, which brings to my second point.

2) History of Asian immigration explains a lot: The history is very short and the talent demographics of the immigrants were not generally favorable for business success. Only exception would be Indian Americans - vast amount of Indian immigrants are technology professionals and their children had it relatively easier to (and were encouraged to) enter the mainstream American economy. That's why we see more "Raj, our tennis playing frat bro who now works at Morgan Stanley" than we see "Chen, that cool football playing Asian dude who works at [name some fortune 500]".

However, vast amount of East Asian immigrants, who only came over couple decades ago, were working class. In a short time period, this has an immense causality on acceptance to the mainstream economy. The same was true when the working-class Catholic Europeans - Italians, Irish, Polish ,etc... - immigrated to the US during the late 19th century and the early 20th century: It took a while for them start entering the mainstream economy. Some reasons are issues of lack of desire to even be part of the mainstream economy. You'll be surprised how big of a factor this is. These Catholic European-Americans only started entering the mainstream business world after World War II.

Another interesting example is Hawaii, where the history of Asian immigration has a much longer history - long enough for Asians to establish good roots and establish themselves as the ones who hold economic power. Hawaii being a relatively isolated place (economically speaking) and being so close to Asia certainly played a big part.

3) Last but not the least, Asian people in the US have a much higher tendency to enter more "professional" fields that require higher levels of education than any other ethnicity. About 6% of Americans are Asian. About 17% of medical doctors in the US are Asian. No need to bring up how many Asian Americans are present in fields like technology. The rough breakdown of the technology workforce is a third Indian, a third East Asian, and a third mix of everyone else. Lots of Asian people just don't go into business. And quite frankly, that means not enough become C-suites. This unusually high preference to become a highly-skilled professional is a major factor on why Asian Americans have one of the highest levels of education. Stereotypes exist for a reason...

TL;DR: Not enough Asians being C-suites and board members is not a surprise for 3 reasons. 1) Education has no causal relationship with being a good business leader. 2) Asian Americans simply didn't have enough time to condition themselves to a point where they start
to actively enter the mainstream American business world. 3) Many many Asian Americans simply prefer to be high-skill professionals, not business people.

Finance Data Science

    • 6
Jun 4, 2020

I was going to type out a long answer, but I think you covered all of my points.

While I think it's very easy to simply point at racial discrimination, one must also acknowledge that there are completely legitimate reasons that has nothing to do with racism - namely the points you brought up.

Especially the educational argument, where (IMO) the initial premise is flawed - that being academically gifted automatically translates to being good at sales and relationship building, thus warranting the academically gifted to hold positions that reward sales and relationship acumen. (Well, those positions are certainly more than just sales and being able to network, but point still stands).

It's like arguing that musicians from Juilliard, Berklee, etc. are underrepresented in the billboard hot 100 chart because of some external force - after all, these are the best musicians, theoretically and technically, so why shouldn't they get to become rich stars? Must be some biased hand holding them down. Then reality sets in, and one realize that the billboard hot 100 doesn't reward a mastery of musical theory or extensive knowledge in contemporary classical music.

    • 5
Jun 5, 2020

Highlighting the supposed "plight" of Asian Americans is a truly preposterous waste of time.

Even if only considering the relative needs of/extents to which their "underrepresentation" has been effectuated on the basis of racially discriminatory acts versus that of African Americans/people of color, it's a total joke of an assertion.

As many above have indicated, the reality is worse still:

  • there is far more vitriolic/hateful race-based bigotry in Asian countries/cultures than in any Western nation
  • those who immigrate to the West from the East are among the most stubbornly unwilling to make even a half-assed attempt at assimilating (sorry, if you want to be a leader in organizations anywhere, at any point in human history, you have to try to get good at working with the other humans in that era/region, that means assimilating a bit and learning the culture, Asian people think they're so special that they don't have to do this)
  • by their collective refusal to assimilate, the ultimate set of outcomes is obviously going to be less optimal; the fact that they have as much representation as they do is indicative of a the cultural imperatives around hard-work and discipline; without these traits their representation would be far lower (e.g. actually reflect their willingness for/actions taken to become actively engaged members of their new communities and do so in a way that shows respectful deference to local social norms)

Consider for a moment, what the outcome would be if Western people/companies went to the East and demonstrated such wholesale disrespect to their norms/standards?

"You don't know", you say, "it depends on the situation".

Okay, let me help you then. The company/people would be blacklisted from ever receiving any business what-so-fucking-ever in the East ever a-fucking-gain! Are you as emotionally unintelligent as these fuckers too?! Jesus fucking Christ. Demonstrations of respectful deference to social customs are to Eastern countries as finding the most creatively terrible ways to murder people is to ISIS. It's literally the cornerstone of the social order.

Similarly, because of that, Asians (not all, but many) tend to be obnoxiously hypocritical.

Cue the PC police coming to serve an arrest warrant for now kowtowing to their bullshit standards of not offending anyone.

"In order to be a really good investor, you need to be a little bit of a philosopher as well."
-Dan Loeb

    • 6
    • 7
Jun 5, 2020

Lol. yeah once you get to know lots of Asian people, you can tell that they're actually super racist.

But claiming that there is a "double-standard" for Asians is just irrelevant here. Also there really is no double standard. Asians who live in Asia are different from Asians who live in America.

Finance Data Science

    • 1
    • 1
Jun 5, 2020

There's no point in targeting BobTheBaker's assertion by trying to say that Asians and Asian countries are MORE racist. The whole point is that the United States needs to DO BETTER in terms of improving equity and justice.

    • 2
    • 2
Jun 5, 2020

I told you the PC police was gonna come and get me! Didn't I...didn't I? #Sad #FakeProgressives

@DaddyDimon son, you must've misunderstood my comment. I didn't merely state that Asians in Asian countries are more racist, rather, I clearly indicated that the nature of Asian culture is INHERENTLY racist (yes, more so than that of the culture of the United States) AND that Asians in the West hold similarly prejudicial views.

While I do agree with you that the West and, therein particularly, the United States NEEDS to do better, your suggestion that "the WHOLE point is ..." ignores the facts of our existence in the 21st century - e.g. that we live in a globalized society and what happens somewhere on earth is relevant to the rest of the human race. Moreover, it applies a foolishly large discount to the extent to which Asian immigrants have managed to impact the fabric of American society (with positive and negative knock on effects); immigrants from the East are among the loudest, most vocal, disproportionately powerful racial/ethnic minority lobbies in the U.S.

I'm sorry if the coarseness of my words triggered you, but those of us who actually want to get shit done and care about more than saying what's popular to enhance our own image don't give to rancid, moldy shits about your fragile ass. Keep your purity tests to yourself; lord knows this man is probably still a virgin.

"In order to be a really good investor, you need to be a little bit of a philosopher as well."
-Dan Loeb

    • 3
Jun 4, 2020

Selecting the best people is important but diversity in age / thought / race / religion can be additive. The first two are critical, the latter two less so but a nice to have (from a value-add standpoint). On the whole, there's value there, just gotta be highy selective in all instances such that you don't lower quality bar

    • 1
Jun 4, 2020

Not to be confused as rejection of historically cosmopolitan societies, a globalized multi ethnic world is still something that's fairly new for the human psyche.

Array

    • 4
Jun 4, 2020

China and Russia are laughing their asses off at your experiment imploding.

    • 1
Jun 4, 2020

I used to think the way you do before I started working with corporate executives and witnessing how this works. some companies are absolutely better than others, but let me give you an idea of how things go most of the time (in my experience, I don't intimately know every board)

person A gets some position of importance - CEO, CFO, COO, even a division head. they're the only replacement at that time. they send an email out indicating their excitement on what's coming in the future.

person A immediately notices that their immediate coworkers/direct reports are not people they hired. maybe it's because they came up through the company on a unique track, maybe it's because they came from outside, but what happens almost without fail in my experience, they work as quickly and ruthlessly as possible to get "their team" back. this means hiring all of their buddies from past jobs that they work well with. maybe existing people don't get fired (though I have seen this), but they get overlooked for promotions just by sheer bad luck. and yes, I've seen this on the sales side too, good, revenue generating execs getting stepped over because the new head honcho doesn't have a relationship with them.

after a while, person A feels at home, and maybe their buddies from their last job notice some inefficiencies in their direct reports (the people getting stepped over), and so out comes the axe, in comes person A's buddies buddies. and so on and so on. I've seen companies boards completely staffed from alumni of the same corporation, seen good top execs fired because the guy who's the new CEO doesn't like the other guy who was in the running, and those said execs were aligned with the person who didn't get the CEO role. I don't think it's willfully selecting less qualified candidates, but all too often it comes down to "I know this person because I've worked with them, and I don't know that person. better the devil you know than the devil you don't."

it should be a meritocracy, but it's not. I don't think it's direct racism the majority of the time, I really don't. what I do think is that it's unchecked nepotism and more of the "I subconsciously favor you because we have a lot in common and I know you well, and part of that is racial." people tend to bring up those who are like them, and unless their friend group is the great american melting pot, more often than not this means white men helping out other white men, even if it's unintentional.

I don't know if the right answer is to force corporate boards to have diversity quotas like some firms' hiring classes, I don't know that every corporation needs to have someone from every race in their C suite, and quite frankly I don't want to see that stuff legislated by our ineffective government. but what I do know is that whether it's from a place of hatred or whether it's just people wanting to keep the band together, this shit happens.

I like your idea of grassroots, I'm a big believer in that. I also want to point out that grassroots doesn't address whatever issues exist currently (if you believe this is an issue), so there needs to be some ideas on how to build a bridge between now and when today's 5 year old black kids eventually are in the running for CEO jobs in 40 years.

I think shining a light on this is part of the solution. people being aware of unconscious biases may cause them to check themselves when making these decisions. maybe outside HR advisors should press boards for nominations "how many candidates did you consider? can I see their resumes? why did they get chosen over the other options?" unfortunately, psychological biases are things that cannot be legislated away (I'd be willing to bet my next paycheck Amy Cooper has attended a diversity meeting before), so hopefully they just erode faster.

  • Prospect in IB - Gen
Jun 4, 2020

Obviously just a prospect here, but is this kind of nepotism really a bad thing? I think the idea of rising to the level of CEO and being given the power to hire my friends sounds great. As someone coming into adulthood with no non-networking connections, if I get stepped over for someone else, that just means that I didn't develop my relationships well enough, do well enough, or that I should move somewhere else.

Enforcing racial quotas, which you didn't specifically push for but others did, brings with it a whole set of problems similar to the lower standards admission into schools or jobs.

Jun 4, 2020
Prospect in IB - Gen:

Obviously just a prospect here, but is this kind of nepotism really a bad thing?

Good for those with money and power (generally white ppl), bad for those without.

It amazes me the lengths people will go to justify anti-meritocracy as long as it benefits white ppl. Kinda why, even after the varsity blues scandal, we get almost no threads on legacy admissions or donations for admissions but we get a thread every other day on affirmative action.

    • 5
Jun 4, 2020
Prospect in IB - Gen:

Obviously just a prospect here, but is this kind of nepotism really a bad thing? I think the idea of rising to the level of CEO and being given the power to hire my friends sounds great.

stupid

"Markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent."

    • 2
Jun 4, 2020

Great question. It's a bad thing if the CEO isn't aligned with shareholders (often the case) and surrounding himself with cronies only makes him less accountable.

OTOH if it's a good CEO whose agenda is well aligned with improving shareholder value, let him have his team I say. These jobs don't exist to advance society's goals, they exist to advance the company's goals.

    • 1
Jun 4, 2020
Prospect in IB - Gen:

Obviously just a prospect here, but is this kind of nepotism really a bad thing? I think the idea of rising to the level of CEO and being given the power to hire my friends sounds great.

It's great if you're a Russian oligarch.

Finance Data Science

Jun 5, 2020

my perspective may be more ruthless than others, and while I realize that what they're doing is legal, it doesn't make it ethical or logical. hiring someone based on anything but merit puts you at an unnecessary disadvantage if winning is the goal. if you have other goals, like cohesion, stability, etc., maybe you have an argument, but if you want to win, you have to be ruthless. I like winning.

think about it from the perspective of a sports team. you ever been on a team with the coach's kid? was the coach's kid always the best athlete? did the coach's kid ever get benched? hiring your buddies to sit on a board of directors when there are other qualified candidates out there that you just don't happen to know is like putting your kid in at shortstop knowing damn well little timmy hasn't properly fielded a ground ball since 5th grade. anyone who has played sports will tell you that output leads to winning, winning leads to camaraderie, so aside from cancerous players (antonio brown maybe), pick the best person for the job, full stop. sometimes this means passing over your friends, and that's OK.

Jun 4, 2020

Even if we want to assume under-representation is not a purposeful result, implicit bias is something that is pervasive across our country across generations. So while someone may have the intentions of hiring the best candidate, they're going to have an unconscious draw towards people who fit into their biases - most frequently people like themselves (because people see themselves in a favorable light, because people like having things in common, etc.). So that's why people really push on this because if we're all silent on this, most boards and c-suites are just going to be filled with clones of whoever is in head of hiring for those roles.

    • 2
Jun 5, 2020

I've been thinking about this question for a while . . . Is implicit bias something completely negative, or something we can ever hope to completely negate? Frankly, I'm going to trust the person I know more than the person I don't know, and I understand people of my own race more than people of other races. It's important to make an effort to understand people of other races, but I just feel like it's impossible to overcome that natural instinct of trusting people that you understand more.

I've been feeling conflicted about the above train of logic, so would welcome perspectives.

    • 1
    • 3
Jun 7, 2020

Uhhh yeah you overcome implicit bias by being aware of it and not doing the thing you just described where you trust someone based on race

Jun 4, 2020

Its quite ignorant of you to assume that minorities are less qualified and only chosen to fill quotas. The fact you do not appreciate that is pretty mindboggling.

It has been proved through various studies that diversity leads to better business results and having a token person of colour on a board does not help. What is needed is a truly integrated and meritocratic firm. Best example from finance I have is female HF PM's outperform male counterparts on average.

Array

    • 2
  • Prospect in IB - Gen
Jun 4, 2020

Is it really ignorant to assume that minority hires are often less qualified? Look at the results of affirmative action in schools, arguably one of the only differences that can be statistically proven unlike the qualitativeness of interviewing. Blacks and Hispanics have consistently lower SATS, ACTS, LSATS, etc meaning that a black candidate may have an almost guaranteed admittance into a top school while a white student with the same exact background might have no chance at all. Instituting affirmative actions or quotas for executive boards will lead to the same results, but will be harder to prove.

P.S.- Hedge funds run by women have higher failure rates. The "study" you are referring to states

"Surviving funds with at least one female manager have better performance than male-managed surviving funds,"
Notice how it says surviving? Because it doesn't count the failed funds that bring women down in order to make them look superior to men. WOMEN POWER

    • 4
    • 7
Controversial
Jun 4, 2020
Prospect in IB - Gen:

Is it really ignorant to assume that minority hires are often less qualified?

Yes

    • 8
    • 6
Jun 4, 2020

To address your first point, a lot of whites are less academically qualified than Indian, Chinese or SE Asian students. As such, why are there so many white people on executive boards and in other senior management positions?

The reason why Blacks and Hispanics MAY HAVE lower scores (I have not checked and am taking your word for it) is because on average their home environments are not as conducive to studying as that of their white counterparts. This can stem from various issues such as poverty and the stresses associated with it which is a key contributor to higher instances of mental health. Additionally, discrimination and poorer access to resources (think quality of teaching, internet access etc...) as well as the burden of navigating a white world as a POC is incredibly stressful, and something neither you or I can fully appreciate as caucasians. Quite simply, any student coming from such a background who achieves grades in the same ballpark as their white peers are more valuable because i) they have succeeded despite the obstacles they have faced that many whites do not and ii) their outlook on life will be more diverse and thus add meaningful impact to school and corporate communities.

This is not to say white people do not deserve to be promoted or placed into top schools and my argument is applicable to low income whites also. Truly outstanding students will get into the top colleges anyway and this is the burden that Asians face now. Their scores are compared to other Asians so only the best of the best get in, which is inherently unfair. Whereas many of the white students can be relatively mediocre with respect to the Asians and still gain places.

Array

    • 3
  • Intern in IB-M&A
Jun 5, 2020
Prospect in IB - Gen:

Is it really ignorant to assume that minority hires are often less qualified?

Yes, it is. As someone pointed out, whites are less academically qualified than Indian, Chinese and SE Asians. So would it be ignorant to assume half of white hires are less qualified than their Asian counterparts?

It's people like you that make the workplace insufferable where they assume some minority got it by some PC program and not by their own merit.

    • 2
  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
Jun 5, 2020

Okay "prospect" what the fuck do you know about the real world?

    • 1
    • 1
Jun 5, 2020
Prospect in IB - Gen:

Is it really ignorant to assume that minority hires are often less qualified?

You posted this anonymously because you knew that's a racist, garbage take and you're too cowardly to put your name behind it.

    • 3
    • 1
Jun 7, 2020
IC2020:

Its quite ignorant of you to assume that minorities are less qualified and only chosen to fill quotas. The fact you do not appreciate that is pretty mindboggling.
It has been proved through various studies that diversity leads to better business results and having a token person of colour on a board does not help.

No, it was actually never proven that diversity leads to anything.
It might have been proven that there is a CORRELATION (not causality) between diversity and business results.
If you want another theory : Companies that are already more successful have more time and resources to waste on diversity virtue-signalling. Struggling companies are too busy trying to fix their shit to bother.

    • 2
    • 2
Jun 7, 2020

Fine, we can hide behind causality and correlation. Nevertheless, several studies have found this strong correlation. One such study was done by BCG, where the findings can be found here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/annapowers/2018/06/27...
It sounds like you are insinuating that whites are universally better for all roles and diversity is a waste of time? Sounds like a very dangerous thought process, particularly for a VP at a bank...

Array

Jun 4, 2020

The biggest fucking joke is the NFL incentivizing teams to hire minority GM's and coaches to get higher draft picks.

If that's not a one of the biggest PC plays in the last 10 years, sports-wise, then I don't know what is.

    • 6
  • Intern in IB-M&A
Jun 4, 2020

Surprised there wasn't a thread on this tbh

  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
Jun 4, 2020

I thought the same thing! Like can that even be legal? What about the just as good, if not better white coaches?

Not saying a certain color makes a good coach, but if the league said to hire more white dudes for higher picks, everyone would call that racist. Where's the middle ground here?

Jun 4, 2020
Associate 1 in PE - LBOs:

What about the just as good, if not better white coaches?

From 1986 to 2001, black NFL head coaches had a higher winning percentage than white coaches but were more likely to be fired. And when head coaching positions did become available, black coaches weren't getting the same consideration as their white counterparts: Of 139 openings during that span, only six had gone to black coaches. In January of that year, Tony Dungy was fired after a 9-7 record with the Buccaneers and the Vikings fired Dennis Green after going 5-10, his first losing season in 10 years as a head coach.

Lol.

    • 2
Jun 4, 2020

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidberri/2018/01/02...
In the history of the NFL, there have only been 17 black head coaches who have coached at least one entire season (minimum 16 games) with a team. But four of these -- or 23.5% -- were fired from winning teams.

Since 1978, there have been 174 white head coaches who led a team for at least 16 games. Of these, only 12 -- or 6.9% -- were fired from a winning team. So black head coaches appear much more likely -- relative to white head coaches -- to be fired coming off a winning season.

    • 1
  • Developer in RE - Comm
Jun 4, 2020

Notice that no one ever makes the argument in reverse. Black people are much more over-represented as players than they are under-represented as head coaches.

Jun 4, 2020

Best ppl (whatever background, etc), end of story.

Not entirely relevant, but LOL at the NFL contemplating incentives (moving up draft spots for hiring non-white coaches/execs, etc.) to boost racial Diversity. WTF

Edit: whoops didn't see someone commented this NFL item already.

Jun 4, 2020
apricots:

Not entirely relevant, but LOL at the NFL contemplating incentives (moving up draft spots for hiring non-white coaches/execs, etc.) to boost racial Diversity. WTF

Edit: whoops didn't see someone commented this NFL item already.

Crazy shit isn't it?

Jun 4, 2020

Keep in mind that C-suite and especially board are not necessarily chosen for their ability to help the business but rather for their ability to serve the CEO's personal goals. Boards tend to be highly sycophantic and the ideal board member for a CEO is someone who will go along with whatever the CEO wants but will be immune from shareholder criticism.

Separately from that, female/URM board members are unassailable.

So OP is asking whether pursuing female/URM reduces the talent pool for candidates, yes it does but CEO doesn't want the best board member. CEO wants a sycophant with the added bonus of being diverse and thus protected.

    • 2
  • Analyst 1 in IB-M&A
Jun 4, 2020

Here's a thought experiment, which of the two groups of people is considered more diverse and cosmpolitan:

  • A group of Americans of different races
  • A group of white people, with one from each European country
    • 1
  • Developer in RE - Comm
Jun 4, 2020

It's not that complicated, actually. The first group would be considered more diverse.

People raise these questions all the time (i.e. "Shouldn't Yale recruit more poor conservative kids from rural West Virginia?", etc.) But in reality, the word "diversity" simply means fewer white people (and to a lesser extent, in certain contexts, fewer Asians). Referring to my comments above- that's why you'll never hear a mostly black NBA or NFL team criticized for its lack of diversity, because reducing the number of black people would be antithetical to the concept of diversity.

The word in practice means something different than what its dictionary definition says. In the diversity calculation, social class, religion, and even country of origin have little or no relevance.

    • 4
Jun 5, 2020
Developer in RE - Comm:

that's why you'll never hear a mostly black NBA or NFL team criticized for its lack of diversity, because reducing the number of black people would be antithetical to the concept of diversity.

Stop pushing garbage assumptions. You're purposefully being obtuse to justify your bias.

    • 1
    • 2
  • Prospect in IB - Gen
Jun 4, 2020

Incoming "whites can't be diverse"

Diverse is code for anti-white, and anti-asian when it comes to schools and jobs.

Edit: Stepped away from my computer while the above poster replied, his response is better.

    • 3
  • Analyst 1 in IB-M&A
Jun 5, 2020

You are both correct.

Jun 4, 2020

Yea, buts that when we refer to blacks. Every black person doesn't come from the same place.

    • 1
Jun 4, 2020

It's annoying hearing those studies on how resumes with non-white sounding names are rejected for top jobs. This is a relationship business. Full stop. Know to play. If you're the son of a Nigerian minister, you can bet that London shop working west Africa won't give one fuck about your multi vowel name. In fact, the carpet will be rolled out.

Array

  • Analyst 1 in IB-M&A
Jun 5, 2020

It's funny when non-minority people get so annoyed when there's diversity like "when's white male day"?

    • 12
    • 1
  • Intern in IB-M&A
Jun 5, 2020

"What do you mean we don't get our own diversity program when we're 73% of the population?! AA is stupid - what about the poor white kid in West Virginia?"

Give me a break, you would back-stab that WV kid in any way possible to get an offer...

    • 9
    • 3
  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
Jun 5, 2020

Butthurt conservative pussies throwing MS because they know it's true.

I'm ready for my MS, bring it on.

    • 4
    • 2
Jun 7, 2020

What i personally don't understand is why skin color is the marker of some superior type of diversity that would magically enhance business performance.
Apart form being a more immediately "visible" trait, it is as irrelevant as foot size.

  • Analyst 1 in IB-M&A
Jun 7, 2020
Comment
Jun 8, 2020
Comment

Array

    • 1
Jun 5, 2020
Jun 5, 2020