To address your puzzlement: I believe the difference lies in your very charitable interpretation of what corporations understand as diversity. In reality, this often equates not to non-discrimination and justice but to affirmative action. As someone in mid-level management at a big tech company, I have learned from numerous conversations with senior leadership that they are usually hesitant to drive DEI policies on moral grounds due to their controversial nature. Instead, they emphasize the business case for diversity, as it is less contentious. Ultimately, this approach comes across as a disingenuous coping strategy. Many leaders avoid delving into or outright ignore the empirical evidence because they fear uncovering uncomfortable truths. It's like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, blindly clinging to selective studies from McKinsey or BCG to maintain a veneer of progress. This approach is not only foolish but also perilous, as it perpetuates ignorance and avoids confronting inconvenient truths.
This article, especially the Warner Bros example, brings to mind the corporate trend of flaunting rainbow colors during Pride Month literally everywhere, except in places where it truly matters, like the Middle East. Frankly, I lean towards the cynical viewpoint, seeing diversity used as a mere facade to please shareholders and appeal to college graduates and applicants.
To address your puzzlement: I believe the difference lies in your very charitable interpretation of what corporations understand as diversity. In reality, this often equates not to non-discrimination and justice but to affirmative action. As someone in mid-level management at a big tech company, I have learned from numerous conversations with senior leadership that they are usually hesitant to drive DEI policies on moral grounds due to their controversial nature. Instead, they emphasize the business case for diversity, as it is less contentious. Ultimately, this approach comes across as a disingenuous coping strategy. Many leaders avoid delving into or outright ignore the empirical evidence because they fear uncovering uncomfortable truths. It's like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, blindly clinging to selective studies from McKinsey or BCG to maintain a veneer of progress. This approach is not only foolish but also perilous, as it perpetuates ignorance and avoids confronting inconvenient truths.
Well said, that's it!
I completely agree. The level of steelmanning seems a tiny bit excessive.
This article, especially the Warner Bros example, brings to mind the corporate trend of flaunting rainbow colors during Pride Month literally everywhere, except in places where it truly matters, like the Middle East. Frankly, I lean towards the cynical viewpoint, seeing diversity used as a mere facade to please shareholders and appeal to college graduates and applicants.