“Diversity is about more than visible differences between people. 

What matters is what diverse perspectives bring to decision making. “

Most people agree that diversity in the workplace is a good thing. The McKinsey report  “Diversity Matters Even More: The Case for Holistic Impact” of December 2023, concludes that diverse firms have better performance and higher financial returns than non-diverse industry peers. Indeed, there is evidence that a diverse leadership team is more creative and reactive to the market in which they operate than a homogeneous team. In many ways the demand for diversity is grounded in the need to recruit leaders that represent and understand all segments of the firms’ operations: customers, shareholders, suppliers; in short, all stakeholders.

But what is diversity? Why is it important?

“A diverse team can be achieved by recruiting talent with differences in terms of age, educational background, culture, international experience, gender and of course, race.”

Firms need to define or re-define what diversity is, why it is important, and how it can contribute to the value creation of the firm. What really matters aren’t the visible differences between people. What matters is what diverse perspectives bring to decision making.  In other words, a diverse team can be achieved by recruiting talent with differences in terms of age, educational background, culture, international experience, gender and of course, race. But the problem is getting there for the right reasons and using the right process.

The process to achieve diversity.

Trying to improve minority representation through quotas might lead to controversy as well as employee resentment. Also, minority hires might feel that they are hired to make up numbers rather than for their talent. So, diversity hiring might unintentionally lead to unintended consequences.

So, let’s say that a company recognizes that a firms’ leadership needs to be every bit as diverse as the market in which they operate, and they decide to recruit a more diverse applicant pool. This strategy can only work if there is a corporate culture that’s committed to fostering an inclusive environment and if there is a search and interview process that is deliberately tailored to attract and develop a diverse candidate pool. However, more and more firms are recruiting using AI generated algorithms and social network sourcing like LinkedIn which increases the probability of discriminatory and biased outcomes, especially with regards to gender, age, and race. To make matters worse, firms have substituted professional and knowledgeable recruiters with inexperienced screeners and interviewers that use a “cookie cutter” approach in their recruiting process and fail to find and identify the best talent. This process doesn’t work, and predictably results in bad outcomes and lack of legitimacy.

As anti-DEI campaigns increase, there is an increase in demand for data on the recruiting processes. Therefore, firms need to carefully navigate this environment by using external recruiters that are trained to identify, screen, and provide firms with the best candidates, using professional and tailored approaches to the recruiting process.

See also: Navigating the Complex Trends of the Anti-DEI Activism:

A Recruiter’s Perspective