When I first began to pen a few blogs I asked my daughter (far more au fait than me with social media!) for advice – I told her I was concerned about writing and expressing a view or perspective that other people might disagree with, and how I may then be ‘attacked’ on social media by so called faceless ‘keyboard warriors’. Her advice was simple – there is no point writing a blog if all you are going to do is agree with everyone else, in other words you must have a viewpoint to express on a topic, and then be able to defend it. If you cannot defend it, don’t write it!

Well, in the spirit of now courting some controversy, I felt it was time to write about diversity quotas.

---

I have been hiring people for my various organisations for some 40 years, starting in the 1980s. An early mentor told me I could do little wrong in the interview process if I selected people on the primary basis of their skills, and ensured the application process was open to all. My mentor quoted the late Prime Minister of the UK, Margaret Thatcher, who said, “Equality of opportunity is freedom, but equality of outcome is repression.” Her belief was in the importance of providing individuals with equal opportunities to succeed, while opposing the idea of ensuring equal outcomes for everyone, which she viewed as limiting personal freedom and initiative.

 

Hiring based on skills versus meeting diversity quotas is a topic that continues to be debated. After many years I have a framework which guides me, and it is one that does not involve my becoming overwhelmed by process (checks and balances, coordination, assessments, quotas – all of which have the effect of stopping us from simply getting things done!). I start from an equality of opportunity perspective, where it is crucial to understand why prioritising skills and qualifications can be more beneficial for both my organisation and the employee. 

 

It is not my intention here to undermine the importance of diversity but to highlight how skill-based hiring can complement diversity efforts, provide intellectual variety, and promote true equality of opportunity.

 

Meritocracy and Fairness

A skill-based approach is fundamentally meritocratic. It ensures that positions I fill are with individuals who are most qualified for the job, irrespective of their background. This fosters a culture in my organisation of fairness, and encourages everyone to develop their abilities to their fullest potential. I have found when hiring is based solely on skills, it naturally eliminates biases or preconceptions associated with race, sex, gender, or other social categories. This approach creates a more level playing field where everyone has the chance to succeed based on their capabilities and hard work.

 

Competence and Performance

We all know that our organisations thrive when they have the right talent. Skill-based hiring ensures that our employees are selected for their ability to perform the job effectively. This leads to higher productivity, better job satisfaction, and lower turnover rates. The people I have employed over the years have, I believe, felt valued for their contributions, which can lead to higher engagement and motivation. In contrast, I suggest when hiring decisions are influenced by quotas, there is a risk of placing less emphasis on actual job requirements, potentially leading to a mismatch in job skills and performance expectations.

 

Fostering Genuine Diversity

Diversity is more than just numbers. True diversity includes a range of perspectives, experiences, and skills – essential in building high-performing teams, and avoiding Group Think. I have found that skill-based hiring doesn’t exclude diversity; rather, it has enhanced it. When I focus on skills, I find I naturally draw from a broader talent pool. This approach encourages diversity of thought and innovation, as it brings together individuals with varied skills and experiences who might otherwise be overlooked – equality of opportunity.

 

Reducing Tokenism and Stereotyping

Hiring to meet quotas can inadvertently lead to tokenism, where individuals are perceived as mere representatives of a particular group rather than valued for their individual merits. This can be detrimental to the workplace and the team environment, as it may lead to feelings of inadequacy among those hired under such policies and can reinforce negative stereotypes. Skill-based hiring alleviates these concerns, as the primary focus is on the individual’s ability and fit (to the culture of the team/organisation) for the role.

 

Benefits for Society

Outside of my organisations I would argue when the job market prioritises skills and qualifications, it encourages individuals to invest in their personal and professional development. This must inevitably have a positive ripple effect on our society, as people strive to enhance their skills and knowledge to compete effectively in the job market. Over time, surely this must lead to a more educated and skilled workforce, which in turn will be beneficial for the growth of our economy (something we desperately need!) and our society as a whole.

 

I have occasionally found myself, unfortunately, on the margins of the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) debate, because I insist on using the term Equality of Opportunity, Diversity and Inclusion – a stance not often agreed with, especially by those who push a quota agenda. But, as I have written on this site before, if we are leading by our values (such as fairness, honesty, human dignity, respect, courage) we have nothing to fear if we believe, and the results suggest, we are doing the right thing. At the end of the day surely what we all want is a more just, productive, and harmonious society.