[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

Depends if it's done right or wrong - if it's for the numbers/stats with arbitrary hires then yes. If it's with a proper understanding that a diverse workforce offering diverse perspectives actually IS better for a workplace/business than simply hiring every applicant "with top grades" then no.

That's what "proper" DEI is about. Understanding that someone with the most experience/best qualifications isn't necessarily the best hire if you already have other staff members with similar experience and qualifications. You want to increase your knowledge and perspective pool "as a whole", not add clones of your best employee.

I get that taking the odd punt/gamble is something that every workforce has to do to bring new possible talent to whatever industry that the company is working in.

But ultimately you want people that are just good at their job, because hiring diverse just for a "different perspective" can lead to insane ideas being pushed forward in the workplace, that the more qualified and better at the job worker would've avoided entirely.

Just look at the US Election between Trump and Hilary, Hilary was way more qualified and would've been the better leader, but the public picked Trump/Republicans instead, even though Trump had zero experience in Politics at the time.

For me screw with box ticking with the demographics, it's no coincidence that society around all of the first world nations have been having issues within a lot of different industries since the motto isn't to hire the best people for the job anymore.

It'd be like hiring Wayne Rooney to manage another Championship side after already relegating two other Championship sides, all because he ticks some kind of demographic box I'm sure, because it sure isn't for his tactics.

Speaking for myself, I would want a job that valued my skill at the job (or my potential skill at the job) rather than be seen as some sort of demographic needing to be ticked off.