In a lot of companies and educational organizations today....it's hyped-up about DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion).
Yet, when you say that so-and-so was hired under the 'umbrella' of diversity, equity and inclusion....folks seem to get disturbed and upset.
I paused over this dilemma. It's just odd.
You go out and hire four new employees for the company, with stringent rules in place...forcing you to use DEI-thinking, and a month after you hire the four....you quietly say in some talk with management that they were DEI-hirees.
People get disturbed. Logic?
Well....it seems like you are saying that DEI-hirees are lesser people, and you wouldn't have hired them under normal non-DEI conditions.
This naturally triggers people into being defensive....that if you utter this guy or gal was a DEI-hiree....they just aren't as capable as others.
But the more you pause over this and think about it....that is true design of DEI....you brought a lesser candidate into the company. Maybe they will eventually improve....maybe you wake up in six years to realize that the person was a zero-fit for the organization and you really screwed up.
Would you use DEI to select a New York Yankees team? Well....NO. There's money and the fan-base...on the line.
Would you use DEI to select astronauts? I kinda doubt it.
Would you use DEI to choose the head idiot of the Star Wars studio? Maybe, but I might end up some crappy story where Luke Skywalker's son is a transwoman, and some Wookie has taken up a relationship with the 'gal'. In this storyline with DEI elements....you actually appreciate the clone of Darth Vader killing off a bunch of characters.
Would you use DEI to select a President? Well....maybe it'd work, but mostly because you have forty people around them who make up for all the weak points, and you (the President) just promote yourself as the acting-President....when it's six to ten folks who really carry out the function of the Presidency.
Just something to think about.