“To make sure we built the most diverse team ever assembled by a presidential campaign, I brought in Bernard Coleman as the first-ever chief diversity officer, made sure women were half the staff, and hired hundreds of people of color, including for senior leadership roles”
That one made me cry and laugh at the very same time. They are crying that she lost after choosing “the most diverse” instead of “the most effective” or even “somewhat effective” team members. “L” is for Logic. But it’s a real trend in some societies. I still vividly remember some companies that chose engineers according to their ability to be politically correct in their messages.
– Do you know how to build a bridge?
– No, but I understand the importance of equality for transgenders.
– You are hired!
It’s very funny to me that some people don’t see the relation between
- “We started the first presidential company in the world with positive discrimination for the team”
and
- “We lost badly.”
What do we need? It's obvious: more positive discrimination. We just didn't have it enough.
Do you think it’s possible to have success if you form your team not by their qualification but by other factors?
No comments :
Post a Comment