4 ms·
Your overall stance seems to require the assumption that “diversity on paper” is the more common/significant outcome relative to “diversity of opinion”. Do you
by anthony_romeo 6y ago
Your overall stance seems to require the assumption that “diversity on paper” is the more common/significant outcome relative to “diversity of opinion”. Do you happen to have any info which might support such an assumption?
- AnthonyMouse 6y agoThe thing you're asking for is the source of the problem. It's the Seeing Like A State thing. If you had some kind of actually robust diversity metric and not something which is going to get crushed into a black hole by Goodhart's Law then you would have a solution to the problem, but if you don't then you can't even measure it. If you wanted actual diversity then what you would presumably do is gather all the data you can on multiple metrics (birthplace, parental income, culture, language, etc.) and then hire for maximum entropy. "Diversity" hiring based on a specific individual metric is literally the opposite of that, because it finds the people who are the least unlike the existing people in your company but can check the box on the form.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]