I view DEI as a way to make sure you're hiring the most qualified and capable people rather than just a bunch of mediocre white guys.
But people have blind spots around hiring practices. People are more comfortable working along side people with similar backgrounds and who think similarily to them. They overvalue these traits, so they miss the more valuable input from someone who is coming from a different place and different train of thought. People are more likely to overlook a key contribution if it's not a contribution they could have thought of.
The corporate world is still dominated by straight white males. As a straight white male in the corporate world, I try to be keenly aware of the advantages my background has given me at the same time I try to actively look for differing opinions and more unfamiliar ways of thinking. Being to set in your ways is a major handicap and companies that understand this is search for more diverse leaders have qa competitive advantage.
Companies get this, DEI isn't just a politically correct term to most corporations, it's a way of strengthening the company's bottom line. It's a way of developing new markets and technologies, recognizing new threats and opportunities, and being better for changing business conditions. The companies getting rid of their DEI programs are mostly just not calling it DEI anymore, but will still be striving for the best possible mix of people. The companies who really want to go back to just hiring the same mediocre white males will be at a competitive disadvantage in the long run.
= new reply since forum marked as read