5 ms·

Diversity is mostly a corporate "ideology"

by trophycase 7y ago

ewindal 7y ago
No, corporate adopted it because it’s profitable right now.
- dgellow 7y ago
  Just curious about this: What makes diversity profitable?
  - DoreenMichele 7y ago
    When I worked at a Fortune 500 company, their position was that you can't adequately understand and serve your market if you don't hire a variety of people. If everyone at your company is the same culture, ethnicity, etc, there will be quite large gaps in their knowledge for potential market segments. They had a saying along the lines of "We hire everyone because we sell to everyone."
    - goatinaboat 7y ago
      If everyone at your company is the same culture, ethnicity, etc, there will be quite large gaps in their knowledge for potential market segments. That is true but it is also true that if everyone is 20-something graduate of the same handful of colleges then a group that looks very diverse isn’t diverse at all in any meaningful sense. This should be called “the Google paradox”.
    - refurb 7y ago
      If they sell products to high school dropouts, do they also hire high school dropouts?
  - owenmarshall 7y ago
    Because the lens of American society has moved beyond the acceptance of overt discriminatory practices in many areas, and business moves with societal expectations to capture money. Now, go tell a realtor you want a house in a low crime, quiet neighborhood with highly rated schools and they'll know exactly what you are looking for. Or tell the hiring manager that the candidate you interviewed may not "fit well with the team" and that they should keep looking - they'll get it too.
    - dgellow 7y ago
      You seem to point to hidden racism, but that doesn't answer the question. I see no discussion of profitability in your examples.
      - owenmarshall 7y ago
        Take the contraposition: being overtly racist or segregationist is not profitable. How many whites only lunch counters exist today?
        dgellow 7y ago
        I get your point, but I feel that’s a bit off topic. You can definitely lose money by being overtly discriminatory, that doesn’t imply that diversity is a lucrative thing. Not being discriminatory doesn’t imply that you’re promoting/focusing on diversity.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - blaser-waffle 7y ago
    * It resonates with the current socio-political zietgiest, aka the company sounds hip and in-tune with the times. This improves the brand image, and allows the brand to connect more directly with those who share similar views. * To further the above point, it allows you to position yourself and your brand on the correct side of moral issues. This allows your company to look like it's doing something positive when most companies exist, in a Milton Friedman sense, as soulless money making machines with little regard for anything else. This also allows employees to feel as though they're good/smug/working for a positive organization. * Floating sensitive soicio-political topics leads to great clickbate, and gets lots of eyes on articles and ads. * It allows you to sell to larger demographic. This makes you more money via sales. * It allows you to recruit from larger pools of labor, or at least attempt to appeal to larger numbers of applicants. This allows you to keep labor costs down and/or to find solid candidates from alternative sources. * There is no serious rebuttal to pushing that agenda. If you push back you're a fascist/ageist/racist/ableist/misogynist etc., and this makes the individual, and/or the brand, look bad. As a soulless capitalist I'd be hammering those concepts CONSTANTLY in order to expand the bottom line. Actual adoption, like many boilerplate talks about workplace safety, compliance, and sexual harassment, would be as pro forma as possible, so long as the perceptions were met.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]

Diversity is mostly a corporate "ideology"

ewindal 7y ago

No, corporate adopted it because it’s profitable right now.

dgellow 7y ago
Just curious about this: What makes diversity profitable?
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  When I worked at a Fortune 500 company, their position was that you can't adequately understand and serve your market if you don't hire a variety of people. If everyone at your company is the same culture, ethnicity, etc, there will be quite large gaps in their knowledge for potential market segments. They had a saying along the lines of "We hire everyone because we sell to everyone."
  - goatinaboat 7y ago
    If everyone at your company is the same culture, ethnicity, etc, there will be quite large gaps in their knowledge for potential market segments. That is true but it is also true that if everyone is 20-something graduate of the same handful of colleges then a group that looks very diverse isn’t diverse at all in any meaningful sense. This should be called “the Google paradox”.
  - refurb 7y ago
    If they sell products to high school dropouts, do they also hire high school dropouts?
- owenmarshall 7y ago
  Because the lens of American society has moved beyond the acceptance of overt discriminatory practices in many areas, and business moves with societal expectations to capture money. Now, go tell a realtor you want a house in a low crime, quiet neighborhood with highly rated schools and they'll know exactly what you are looking for. Or tell the hiring manager that the candidate you interviewed may not "fit well with the team" and that they should keep looking - they'll get it too.
  - dgellow 7y ago
    You seem to point to hidden racism, but that doesn't answer the question. I see no discussion of profitability in your examples.
    - owenmarshall 7y ago
      Take the contraposition: being overtly racist or segregationist is not profitable. How many whites only lunch counters exist today?
      - dgellow 7y ago
        I get your point, but I feel that’s a bit off topic. You can definitely lose money by being overtly discriminatory, that doesn’t imply that diversity is a lucrative thing. Not being discriminatory doesn’t imply that you’re promoting/focusing on diversity.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- blaser-waffle 7y ago
  * It resonates with the current socio-political zietgiest, aka the company sounds hip and in-tune with the times. This improves the brand image, and allows the brand to connect more directly with those who share similar views. * To further the above point, it allows you to position yourself and your brand on the correct side of moral issues. This allows your company to look like it's doing something positive when most companies exist, in a Milton Friedman sense, as soulless money making machines with little regard for anything else. This also allows employees to feel as though they're good/smug/working for a positive organization. * Floating sensitive soicio-political topics leads to great clickbate, and gets lots of eyes on articles and ads. * It allows you to sell to larger demographic. This makes you more money via sales. * It allows you to recruit from larger pools of labor, or at least attempt to appeal to larger numbers of applicants. This allows you to keep labor costs down and/or to find solid candidates from alternative sources. * There is no serious rebuttal to pushing that agenda. If you push back you're a fascist/ageist/racist/ableist/misogynist etc., and this makes the individual, and/or the brand, look bad. As a soulless capitalist I'd be hammering those concepts CONSTANTLY in order to expand the bottom line. Actual adoption, like many boilerplate talks about workplace safety, compliance, and sexual harassment, would be as pro forma as possible, so long as the perceptions were met.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]