I agree with Luke. We've been doing "voluntary" for decades with little to no change - racial discrimination in job applications has been stable across Western countries in the last 50 years.
Time to put pen to paper and commit with real accountability and consequences for not complying. This is more of a behavioral change exercise than a mindset exercise.
Companies need to attract a diverse range of people....If you're attractive to the most diverse range of candidates is it because your white, middle aged, male chief-exec (and potentially identical board) has signed a doc and has a portion of bonus linked to DEI targets? Or is it because you see a diverse, inclusive culture at board level that filters down naturally because they represent what they say the culture is?
It feels like forcing a statement to be made drives the wrong behaviour and actions aren't going to be with the best interests leading.
Wow what an interesting read! I personally think this is bonkers and agree with Conor as essentially this will create more harm than good. Aside from this a racist could use ChatGPT to write a lovely statement for them to pop into an application so how is this going to be measured!
It’s comforting to know a large % of US faculty workers disagree with the criteria!
I agree with Benjamin - mandatory doesn’t imply sincerity to me, it becomes something they had to sign to get the job. Better to assess for & hire/promote/reward authentic belief & commitment (IMO)
might be a good one to do for a Brainfood Live, I suspect most of brainfood going to agree with your view on this, but lets see what the distribution of the votes is on this poll
It would be a very good Brainfood live. It’s an important debate as I believe the single biggest area where D&I falls down is a lack of meaningful engagement at a management level.
Im generally not a big fan of mandating anything but believe strongly that there should be a basic level of agreed commitment from those who have influence in our organisations.
I hear you. I share your general aversion for mandates - Ben has made an important point on authenticity also - but I wonder whether the public commitment itself will force change even if it isn't universally embraced. I think possible to have a strong argument in either case, so definitely worth exploring further in respectful debate
I agree with Luke. We've been doing "voluntary" for decades with little to no change - racial discrimination in job applications has been stable across Western countries in the last 50 years.
Time to put pen to paper and commit with real accountability and consequences for not complying. This is more of a behavioral change exercise than a mindset exercise.
Companies need to attract a diverse range of people....If you're attractive to the most diverse range of candidates is it because your white, middle aged, male chief-exec (and potentially identical board) has signed a doc and has a portion of bonus linked to DEI targets? Or is it because you see a diverse, inclusive culture at board level that filters down naturally because they represent what they say the culture is?
It feels like forcing a statement to be made drives the wrong behaviour and actions aren't going to be with the best interests leading.
Wow what an interesting read! I personally think this is bonkers and agree with Conor as essentially this will create more harm than good. Aside from this a racist could use ChatGPT to write a lovely statement for them to pop into an application so how is this going to be measured!
It’s comforting to know a large % of US faculty workers disagree with the criteria!
I agree with Benjamin - mandatory doesn’t imply sincerity to me, it becomes something they had to sign to get the job. Better to assess for & hire/promote/reward authentic belief & commitment (IMO)
Obviously diversity is an important topic. If you make the statement mandatory it could lack the sincerity and actions to back it up.
very good point Ben - you can imagine career orientated types just chatGPT'ing it, or worse just signing up a template. So authenticity gap then.
Mandatory. Inclusive leadership as a skill should be an essential requirement of any leadership role.
might be a good one to do for a Brainfood Live, I suspect most of brainfood going to agree with your view on this, but lets see what the distribution of the votes is on this poll
It would be a very good Brainfood live. It’s an important debate as I believe the single biggest area where D&I falls down is a lack of meaningful engagement at a management level.
Im generally not a big fan of mandating anything but believe strongly that there should be a basic level of agreed commitment from those who have influence in our organisations.
I hear you. I share your general aversion for mandates - Ben has made an important point on authenticity also - but I wonder whether the public commitment itself will force change even if it isn't universally embraced. I think possible to have a strong argument in either case, so definitely worth exploring further in respectful debate
appreciate you taking the lead with the commentary Luke!