How many people practice "Diversity Lite"?

[apl68]

I have to try to pick what looks like the best person for the job.  I also have to pick somebody who will help us to maintain a "diverse" staff.  Neither is optional.  And so there are times when I have to work out the best compromise that I can manage between these two considerations.

Well, this is a multiple-objective optimization problem, so how do you decide on the relative weight between these two factors (which can then have a dramatic impact on individual outcomes)?

That's a good question--which I'm still trying to find the right answers to.

[mahagonny]

Not a professor but:

One time my group hired some summer students.  They were all male. I asked my boss about that. She replied "That is all they gave me to interview."
We are located less than 5 miles from our State U. Was anyone making an effort to recruit diverse candidates?

So do you see STEM students who are not male and recruit them to be TAs?

Maybe they thought male TA's means less liability from sexual harassment claims.

[marshwiggle]

Not a professor but:

One time my group hired some summer students.  They were all male. I asked my boss about that. She replied "That is all they gave me to interview."
We are located less than 5 miles from our State U. Was anyone making an effort to recruit diverse candidates?

So do you see STEM students who are not male and recruit them to be TAs?

I have, but this raises an ethical issue. How ethical is it to ignore qualified students who have gone through the prescribed application process to potentially hire people who are not more qualified and have not applied?

[ergative]

Not a professor but:

One time my group hired some summer students.  They were all male. I asked my boss about that. She replied "That is all they gave me to interview."
We are located less than 5 miles from our State U. Was anyone making an effort to recruit diverse candidates?

So do you see STEM students who are not male and recruit them to be TAs?

I have, but this raises an ethical issue. How ethical is it to ignore qualified students who have gone through the prescribed application process to potentially hire people who are not more qualified and have not applied?

I agree that this is not ethical. But I think there's nothing wrong with looking at the applicant pool, and, time permitting, delay interviews to send out the posting more aggressively to other demographics encouraging them to apply.

[Caracal]

Not a professor but:

One time my group hired some summer students.  They were all male. I asked my boss about that. She replied "That is all they gave me to interview."
We are located less than 5 miles from our State U. Was anyone making an effort to recruit diverse candidates?

So do you see STEM students who are not male and recruit them to be TAs?

I have, but this raises an ethical issue. How ethical is it to ignore qualified students who have gone through the prescribed application process to potentially hire people who are not more qualified and have not applied?

I agree that this is not ethical. But I think there's nothing wrong with looking at the applicant pool, and, time permitting, delay interviews to send out the posting more aggressively to other demographics encouraging them to apply.

Ethical seems like the wrong term. If you have an application process, you should use it. I'm a bit confused, however. If there was a qualified candidate, do you think it would be wrong to encourage them to apply?

[marshwiggle]

How ethical is it to ignore qualified students who have gone through the prescribed application process to potentially hire people who are not more qualified and have not applied?

I agree that this is not ethical. But I think there's nothing wrong with looking at the applicant pool, and, time permitting, delay interviews to send out the posting more aggressively to other demographics encouraging them to apply.

Ethical seems like the wrong term. If you have an application process, you should use it. I'm a bit confused, however. If there was a qualified candidate, do you think it would be wrong to encourage them to apply?

As I highlighted above, my concern is about recruiting and hiring someone who is not demonstratably more qualified than someone who applied. If all of the applicants fell short of what you were looking for, and you could recruit someone who clearly met the requirements; a.k.a. was obviously superior, then I  wouldn't have a problem with it.

So recruiting a candidate who is no better than existing applicants but is more "diverse" doesn't sit well with me.

[mahagonny]

How ethical is it to ignore qualified students who have gone through the prescribed application process to potentially hire people who are not more qualified and have not applied?

I agree that this is not ethical. But I think there's nothing wrong with looking at the applicant pool, and, time permitting, delay interviews to send out the posting more aggressively to other demographics encouraging them to apply.

Ethical seems like the wrong term. If you have an application process, you should use it. I'm a bit confused, however. If there was a qualified candidate, do you think it would be wrong to encourage them to apply?

As I highlighted above, my concern is about recruiting and hiring someone who is not demonstratably more qualified than someone who applied. If all of the applicants fell short of what you were looking for, and you could recruit someone who clearly met the requirements; a.k.a. was obviously superior, then I  wouldn't have a problem with it.

So recruiting a candidate who is no better than existing applicants but is more "diverse" doesn't sit well with me.

Sure... and we know how to deal with people like you (not leftists). Keep just a few of you around to show we're open minded. But no more than a few.

[mleok]

For our search process, we are allowed to reach out and encourage applicants to apply to a job opening up to the deadline, but we cannot actively solicit applications after that deadline. But, if the applicant pool is deemed inadequate, even if it is because of the lack of diversity in the applicant pool, then the search can be reopened with an extended deadline, but that would be something that would be open to all applicants.

[Hibush]

For our search process, we are allowed to reach out and encourage applicants to apply to a job opening up to the deadline, but we cannot actively solicit applications after that deadline. But, if the applicant pool is deemed inadequate, even if it is because of the lack of diversity in the applicant pool, then the search can be reopened with an extended deadline, but that would be something that would be open to all applicants.

This is the fairest process. If the makeup of the applicant pool indicates that you didn't recruit applicants effectively enough, you should reopen the pool and recruit harder. The deficiency could be in a diversity measure, or something else. The remedy is the same. Doing the analysis is kind of a pain, but you learn useful things.

The key is making sure all the qualified candidates apply, and there are a variety of reasons diverse candidates don't apply that are unrelated to qualifications. Some bring additional value by virtue of having experience and expertise that is absent in the department.

I had a search in which we knew that the pool was about 50% female, but that theoretically there may have been three African Americans in the whole country at the right career stage. We were not aware of any specific individuals. We recruited exhaustively and ended up with a pool that was 55% female, but no African Americans. The diversity office had had a firm advertise in the specialty publications designed for diversity recruiting, but that effort really only served to increase their advertising revenue. We were not asked to reopen the search.

[marshwiggle]

I had a search in which we knew that the pool was about 50% female, but that theoretically there may have been three African Americans in the whole country at the right career stage. We were not aware of any specific individuals. We recruited exhaustively and ended up with a pool that was 55% female, but no African Americans. The diversity office had had a firm advertise in the specialty publications designed for diversity recruiting, but that effort really only served to increase their advertising revenue. We were not asked to reopen the search.

This sounds like a ridiculously zealous process. To try and "recruit" from a pool that you can't guarantee actually has any members seems almost like listening for messages from aliens.

[mahagonny]

I had a search in which we knew that the pool was about 50% female, but that theoretically there may have been three African Americans in the whole country at the right career stage. We were not aware of any specific individuals. We recruited exhaustively and ended up with a pool that was 55% female, but no African Americans. The diversity office had had a firm advertise in the specialty publications designed for diversity recruiting, but that effort really only served to increase their advertising revenue. We were not asked to reopen the search.

This sounds like a ridiculously zealous process. To try and "recruit" from a pool that you can't guarantee actually has any members seems almost like listening for messages from aliens.

Only if one takes the view that the diversity office is there to solve problems.

[Hibush]

I had a search in which we knew that the pool was about 50% female, but that theoretically there may have been three African Americans in the whole country at the right career stage. We were not aware of any specific individuals. We recruited exhaustively and ended up with a pool that was 55% female, but no African Americans. The diversity office had had a firm advertise in the specialty publications designed for diversity recruiting, but that effort really only served to increase their advertising revenue. We were not asked to reopen the search.

This sounds like a ridiculously zealous process. To try and "recruit" from a pool that you can't guarantee actually has any members seems almost like listening for messages from aliens.

Some colleagues have research that involves listening for messages from aliens, so perhaps the zeal is appropriate!

Actually, the diversity office completely understood the situation so the diversity office considered the demographic result to be enough diligence. Making some effort to determine whether they exist is worthwhile. Indeed, if a single qualified individual were known to exist there would be direct inquires regarding their professional aspirations. We would for sure want to have the next Mary Jackson in our basketweaving department. If they had a real shot, encourage the to apply. (Making them apply solely to make our search numbers look good would be unethical!)

I consider the performative advertising to be "diversity lite".

[mahagonny]

How about something called 'Diversity' straight up or on the rocks (hard knocks)? Works like this: you oppose ideas such as that changing the requirements so that underrepresented will increasingly be included. You hold on to the standards you have and when the underrepresented appear they will have succeeded purely through competence, which will be an instructive example to their children, and you are happy to see it because you like people and progress.

[Hibush]

How about something called 'Diversity' straight up or on the rocks (hard knocks)? Works like this: you oppose ideas such as that changing the requirements so that underrepresented will increasingly be included. You hold on to the standards you have and when the underrepresented appear they will have succeeded purely through competence, which will be an instructive example to their children, and you are happy to see it because you like people and progress.

Lowering standards so people who can't do the job can be offered the job is indeed terrible. It helps neither the organization nor the poor victim of such a hire or matriculation.

However--and this is what we are actually working on--many standards are tailored so that the unintentionally exclude qualified people who come from different groups than the people who first designed the standards. Those standard do deserve thoughtful modification so that you can consider more people who are qualified, and people who have valuable merits that you didn't previously consider.

It is hard work, and made harder by the people who do a crappy job of it.

[marshwiggle]

However--and this is what we are actually working on--many standards are tailored so that they unintentionally exclude qualified people who come from different groups than the people who first designed the standards. Those standard do deserve thoughtful modification so that you can consider more people who are qualified, and people who have valuable merits that you didn't previously consider.

I'm kind of curious about this. If a standard was "tailored" then that implies it was created with some apparently worthwhile purpose. If in the process, it "unintentionally" excluded qualified people, then it should be a pretty easy sell to "re-tailor" it to retain the original purpose but without the same unintended consequences.

Can you give a concrete example of this? Specifically, I'd like to see an example of how the original goal was preserved, rather than merely removed or eroded, while creating a more inclusive process.