Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
Varies based on the organization, but reports show that "mature" DEI programs see better business outcomes.
https://d1.awsstatic.com/executive-insig...
This study divided businesses into four categories based on their survey responses about their DEI programs. The most mature DEI programs were put into the "leading" category, and least were called "nascent."
Leading organizations
were:
• 2.1x more likely to report usually beating their competitors to market (71% versus 34% among Nascent
organizations). Delving further, on average, Leading organizations enjoy a 4-month time-to-market advantage.
• Growing their market share 51% more (seeing an average 11.67% gain in market share in the last 12 months
versus 7.73% growth among Nascent organizations).
• 2.6x more likely to have beaten their most recent fiscal year revenue expectations by more than 10% (36%
versus 14% among Nascent organizations).
Finally, as it relates to representation, Leading organizations see their DE&I strategies paying dividends:
• 33% increase in representation (relative to Nascent organizations) both in terms of the percent of managers
and new hires that are members of one or more underrepresented groups (e.g., women, black, indigenous,
persons of color, LGBTQ+, and/or individuals with disabilities).
Furthermore, underrepresented individuals in the survey belonging to Leader organizations were:
• 2.1x more likely to strongly agree to say their organization values diversity (74% versus 36% among individuals
at Nascent organizations).
• 2.1x more likely to strongly agree their work is appropriately recognized (63% versus 30%).
• 2x more likely to strongly agree they feel a sense of inclusion at their organization (68% versus 34%).
• 2.2x more likely to strongly agree they feel inspired to give their best to their organization (73% versus 33%).
33% increase in representation (relative to Nascent organizations) both in terms of the percent of managers and new hires that are members of one or more underrepresented groups (e.g., women, black, indigenous, persons of color, LGBTQ+, and/or individuals with disabilities).
This sounds to me like we are counting.
Um, yes, that was part of the survey. You asked how it was determined to be successful, and the clear improvement of business outcomes can be discarded because they were asked about the demographics and responded? Do you know what confirmation bias is? Do you think scanning for the one thing that you might be able to use to support your per-conceived notion while ignoring everything else qualifies?
I keep wondering if conservatives even know what DEI is lol They make it sound like racial hiring quotas which every DEI training I have seen opposes that. It’s literally just removing bias so the best candidate can be hired for the job. That’s it.
It's racial and gender hiring quotas
Biden head of SS had a public, explicit goal of increasing the number of women
In an effort to diversify the agency, Cheatle aims to have 30% female recruits by 2030. Part of that effort has included allowing YouTube influencer Michelle Khare to train with agents.
Because diversity leads to better outcomes you absolute mongs. It’s not about “quotas” it’s about improvement.
It’s so ****ing simple that I’m pretty sure you guys are just trolling at this point
The most succesful a company or institution in general is, the more it can survive DEI shehanigans. So DEI becomes a tool to cement superiority.
It's not that there are no exceptional black IT engineers. But there are very few. If google and it's few peers get all of them, everyone else has either to take in blacks who are worse than whites and asians for some roles, or disregard DEI.
So for google and it's top peers, a society that heavily enforces DEI is a society where only they can fulfill societal obligations, and everyone else is at risk of discrimination lawsuits, or has to compete against google with inferior workers.
It's an artificial moat to competition. Harvard can take in a decent number of actually exceptional blacks and natives and survive DEI almost unscated, but then there are no more left.
A tier 2 or worse college can either hire blacks and natives with far lower SAT scores thatn whites and asians, or risk lawsuits
Again DEI becomes a tool to push the top further away from everyone else.
And this is also why in studies of the efficacy of DEI, people like gorgo confound the causal relationship. Companies that implemented DEI more have better results , because it's the best companies to begin with that can afford to implement DEI more. Not because implementing DEI brings any beneficial effect at all.
It is actually acutely detrimental for success of a company or institution EXCEPT for those few at the top who can still fill racial, gender, etc quota with the very rare exceptional people who isn't asian or white.
I keep wondering if conservatives even know what DEI is lol They make it sound like racial hiring quotas which every DEI training I have seen opposes that. It’s literally just removing bias so the best candidate can be hired for the job. That’s it.
As shown above. No. They don't know what it is.
Because diversity leads to better outcomes you absolute mongs. It’s not about “quotas” it’s about improvement.
It’s so ****ing simple that I’m pretty sure you guys are just trolling at this point
So why , miracoulously, we see no push to bring in more men in all the women-dominated professions? no outcry of a societal disaster if 75% of HR employees are women, or 90%+ of midwives are?
And of course the classic, why isn't NBA domination by blacks used to claim racial discrimination against latinos and asians in that sport?
So why , miracoulously, we see no push to bring in more men in all the women-dominated professions? no outcry of a societal disaster if 75% of HR employees are women, or 90%+ of midwives are?
I dont think men should have jobs anymore. i think they are just good at lifting heavy stuff and for sex. Maybe as firefighters but mostly for the calenders. They dont even want to work.
Unfortunately, Luciom caught this and fixed it, but the original Freudian slip was pretty damn funny.
I dont think men should have jobs anymore. i think they are just good at lifting heavy stuff and for sex. Maybe as firefighters but mostly for the calenders. They dont even want to work.
so diversity is better except when a profession is dominated by women or minorities then it's best not to touch that lineup, correct?
If: attack on far-right wing policies
Then: blame Dems
If: attack on far-right politicians
Then: did you know america had slaves once?
And/Or: blame Dems
If: attack on anything left
Then: pile on
You didn't respond when I ridiculed your first version of this. Are you still blaming Trump's victory on the dozens upon dozens of left-wingers across the country that protest-voted for Trump?
Conservatives think the goal of DEI is diversity in who "succeeds" but it's actually diversity in who gets the opportunity to succeed. It strives to ensure that people aren't prevented from being given an opportunity to succeed based on their race or gender or age.
That's why df examples like "durr why is the NBA all black then?" just expose their limited understanding. The NBA is an excellent example of DEI success. No one is preventing any race from showing they can succeed or contribute to a team's success based on their race in the NBA. To do so would be suicide to the team's chances.
Just look at when sports used to do that. Once the barriers were removed from non-whites having the opportunity, things changed greatly.
That's what DEI is about. Conservatives think DEI wants the NBA to have a representative portion of players from each ethnicity. DEI is really about equal opportunities for all ethnicities (not equal outcomes).
Conservatives think the goal of DEI is diversity in who "succeeds" but it's actually diversity in who gets the opportunity to succeed. It strives to ensure that people aren't prevented from being given an opportunity to succeed based on their race or gender or age.That's why df examples like "durr why is the NBA all black then?" just expose their limited understanding. The NBA
I saw a picture of a white woman who had been appointed to whatever position and a couple conservatives went "CLEAR DEI HIRE!" It's just the current buzzword for them to express their reactionary social grievances. I remember when it was called PC, CRT, and I feel like I'm forgetting another one...
There's a pretty serious upswell of white American hoopers in the NBA, with the top white American prospect since Larry Bird about to be drafted #1 overall. I've seen many racists get very excited about all of these ballin' whites. They're also HUGE fans of Caitlin Clark, although don't ask them to name another player in the league.
I lurk on a large NBA forum and you wouldn't believe how many dudes are concerned with getting more US whites in the NBA, ranking the US whites, lamenting previous low-levels of US whites, etc.
