Let me start by saying that the following is all my opinion. I don't speak for my employer. That said, I do sit on the DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) council at the company. It's also not the first company I've worked at that has a DEI program. In the last year, you'd think those letters translated to KKK or something equally horrible. I'm here to tell you that, as you might expect, the vitriol is nonsense and not rooted in any reality.
The origins of DEI are part of a larger movement for companies to consider their ESG (environmental, social and governance) practices. ESG is actually rooted in investing, and the desire to invest in responsible and ethical companies. For that reason, many companies issue ESG reports that cover a broad spectrum of internal practices, policies and aspirations. It's the closest thing I can think of to morality checking capitalism.
In practice, DEI is not a rebranding of affirmative action. The intent is not to meet hiring quotas, it's to make sure that there are not systematic ways in which discrimination occurs. That's probably the biggest misconception. It doesn't facilitate discrimination, it prevents it. And honestly, it's the kind of thing that was going on before it had a name anyway. For at least a decade, I've worked for companies that actively train people to be aware of unconscious bias, which means actually hiring and treating people on the merits of their ability, which is exactly what the critics call for. Your diversity is artificially limited if the bias creeps into the way you operate.
But there are other bits to it as well. The equity part is largely about making sure that bias and other factors don't cause a disparity in pay across gender, race, age, etc. That's not even a political intent, because companies that let that slide have a tendency to get sued (just ask Apple, among others). HR departments everywhere audit salaries and overall compensation and make sure that there aren't disparities along demographic lines. Again, this was happening before DEI became a thing.
The inclusion bit is just about being good human beings. Tech companies in particular went through a pretty rough patch, where "tech bro" culture systematically pushed out women from the industry. Uber under prior leadership is one of the more widely publicized stories in this area. These days it focuses on making sure that various groups who are marginalized outside of work are a part of the conversation at work. This covers all kinds of areas, including gender, race, sexuality, accessibility, etc. My personal angle on this is to recognize folks who are not neurotypical, as they may not "fit in" necessarily, but it doesn't preclude them from being significant contributors.
So yeah, there's a lot of noise on this subject, and unfortunately it's the stereotypical grievance politics not rooted in experience, just feelings.
No comments yet.