Before we go further into this topic, let’s take care of the elephant in the room. I am a 25-year-old, well-educated, white woman from a middle-class background. I grew up in a two-parent home in a relatively safe, rural community, and atttended small schools where I received a lot of personal attention. In short, I’ve had a lot of advantages.

Quota-based acceptance rates are often geared toward supporting those who haven’t had the same advantages I have, but this isn’t about keeping down the other guy. The central reason is that I don’t think they actually do anything positive for the other guy — or for me, or for anyone at all. In fact, I think they make things worse. Here’s why.

Scenario:

Sue is a hiring manager. She’s narrowed her applications to two candidates for the open position. Applicant A, male, 34, is supremely well-qualified for the position, interviewed well, and is available to start immediately. Applicant B, female, 29, is less qualified with less experience, but also interviewed well and is available to start immediately. Sue reviews her notes carefully, and makes her decision. She wants to hire Applicant A, and the position’s manager and subordinates all agree that he’s the best choice. But when Sue presents her proposal and the offer package to her supervisor for approval, her recommendation is quashed because of a new hiring mandate geared toward evening the gender ratio in the workplace by hiring more women, and the numbers are way off. In other words, no way can they hire a new man. Applicant B gets the job.

Commentary:

This is the essential problem with quota-based hiring: It’s just as discriminatory as its non-quota-based counterpart. The man doesn’t get the job because he’s a man. How is that any different from someone not getting a job because they’re female or black or from a bad neighborhood? If you ask me, it’s the same thing.

Something you’ll here us say on this blog a lot is, “Who says it’s a man’s world?” Women have been increasingly present in the workplace and in their own entrepreneurial ventures over the last several decades, and I would hate to think that it’s because some quota forced companies to hire unqualified people simply to meet some arbitrary requirement. How is that fair? Getting a job because you happened to be more fill-in-random-physical-or-geographical-characteristic-here than the other applicants despite the fact that you’re less qualified is not a good thing.

Take a look at our scenario. Who’s going to feel good about this hiring decision? Well, Sue sure isn’t. She knows that the less qualified applicant got the position, and she’s probably going to feel resentful toward her supervisor for making her offer the job to the wrong person, and she’s also going to resent the new employee for making her feel impotent in her job as hiring manager. The person supervising the new hire isn’t going to feel good about it because he knows the wrong person got the job, too, and that his new employee isn’t as well qualified as the one he wanted and thought he would get. The subordinates of the new hire, who were involved in the interview process and are familiar with the appplicants’ backgrounds, aren’t going to feel good about it because they got the less well-qualified supervisor.

And Applicant B, who just got the job, probably isn’t going to feel too great about it either, not when she gets to work and finds that her boss and the people who answer to her are standoffish and sullen. She may not know why, but if she finds out that they’re mad a less qualified position got the job, that will do little for her confidence in the position or her relationships with her coworkers. If she doesn’t find out, she may feel that she’s being treated that way because she’s a woman (and technically, she’ll be right).

A Better Solution:

I’m all for diversity in the workplace, but it needs to be natural diversity, not the charade of forced quotas. How does that happen? Diversity-focused recruitment efforts. Companies need to attend career fairs, networking events, and university employment events in a variety of geographical and demographic areas. Need a more international workforce? Don’t just hire the first guy from China who applies. Target international career fairs and visit college campuses with a strong international component. Need more women? Try career fairs at women’s colleges, and advertise your openings with professional organizations for women. The more diverse your applicant pool, the more your raise your changes of having a top applicant who will add a unique background and social experience to your organization.

We also need to remember that diversity is more than just sex and skin color. Diversity can also be about religious beliefs, cultural upbringing, geographical origin, political affiliations, and anything else you can think of that makes people who they are. Focusing on the two most superficial elements of diversity is narrowminded and counterproductive.

The key to a truly equitable diverse workplace is not just getting the numbers right. It’s creating a corporate culture that embraces excellence in whatever form it comes, and striving to open opportunities to a wide group of people. If you’re hiring for five positions and the top applicant in each position happens to be a middle-aged white guy, hire five middle-aged white guys. But if all of your recruiting activities are happening in Portland, Oregon, and that happens, you don’t get to complain about the lack of diversity in your organization.

Want a counterpoint? Check out what Rico has to say.

What do you think? Are quota-based hiring methods critical to workplace diversity? Leave a comment.

Contents © Copyright 2008 Kristen King

(photo via SXC.hu)

Tags: women and business, woman, business, diversity, discrimination, affirmative action, quota, race, sex, gender, equality

Post from: EveryJoe

Quota Schmota: Why Race- and Sex-Based Hiring Guidelines Are NOT the Answer

For every job situation…

This is a good time to assess your goals for this year and how you did with progressing toward them.

• What did you set out to accomplish?
• What did you achieve, and what will you continue working on in 2008?
• What 3 things are you most proud of this year?
• What 3 things do you most want to change?
• Is it time to update your resume? (Assume the answer is yes.) What are you waiting for?

Here are some more situation-specific questions to prompt your thinking. Leave a comment to share your responses!

If you’re working a corporate job (or just working for someone else)…

• Are you satisfied with your level of responsibility right now?
• Does your job description match what you actually do?
• Do you feel sufficiently challenged, or is it time to start thinking about going for a promotion?
• What are your goals for next year?
• Did you get enough feedback from your supervisor this year to know what his or her goals are for you?
• Are you statisfied with those whom you supervise and have you offered both positive and critical feedback?

If you’re running a small business…

• How’s your workload? Do you have enough help, not enough help, or too much help?
• Do you feel good about work?
• Are your employees performing to your satisfaction?
• Is it time to make any changes in job descriptions or business structure to accomodate your growth in 2008?
• What specific areas would you like to improve next year?
• What specific ways can you grow your business in the next 12 months?
• Is your bookkeeping up to date and ready for tax time?
• Are you paying yourself enough?

If you’re self-employed…

• How’s business? Are you working and earning as much as you expected?
• Have you found a comfortable work-life balance? Which way do you need to tip the scales?
• How can you grow or manage your business next year?
• Are you comfortable with self-employment, or is it time to hire some outside help?
• What new areas do you want to penetrate in 2008?
• What areas do you want to stop working in next year?
• Are you ready for taxes?

Leave a comment with your thoughts, and keep watching Biz Chicks Rule for more guidance on ending the year with some strong goals. And be sure to check out this end-of-the-year checklist that’s handy for all business owners and self-employed folks.

Contents © Copyright 2007 Kristen King

(photo via SXC.hu)

Tags: new years resolutions, end of the year assessment, business goals, job satisfaction

Post from: EveryJoe

How Do You Feel About Your Career in 2007?

Contents © Copyright 2007 Kristen King

Post from: EveryJoe

Hey, Entrepreneurs: Feeling Overwhelmed by Holiday Business Demands?

• The company does not provide clear, concise instructions on what their hiring needs are or what they expct from their employees. Why should an employee choose to work for a company if THEY don’t even know what they want?
• The company has a laundry list of employee duties and responsibilities but offer a low-to-laughable wages for those duties. This can be very offensive to applicants who have a solid educational background and work history.
• There is poor communication within the company. If management cannot or does not communicate well with its staff, it portrays a very poor professional image. Technology has afforded companies the means without exception to be able to communicate effectively with their employees on a frequent basis.

Many corporations online and offline can hire effective and professional employees by just taking certain steps to ensure that he right applicants will apply for their available positions. Companies are built solidly only on the foundation of its employees. A strong foundation = a strong company.

Post from: EveryJoe

Hiring Employees: A Difficult Task

I got a kick out of Darlene’s post at Interview Chatter. The woman on this YouTube is classic and a major reason why hiring effective employees isn’t easy to do. When you have to find professional and skilled people to help you run your company, what should you look for?

• People who are passionate about what they do and not those who simply want to “draw a check.”
• People who are knowledgeable about the company’s industry. If you are looking at taking on an apprentice, they need to at least have a teachable  personality.
• People who have upbeat, positive attitudes. Nothing like working with someone who hates their lives. And hates yours too.

Back years ago when I was in traditional corporate America, I used to be a hiring manager at a staffing company. My job involved interviewing and hiring applicants for clients that had staffing needs that ranged from industrial settings to office settings. My days would wonderfully consist of deciphering an applicant’s resume or “work sheet” to helping them form complete sentences to be able to articulate their work ethic to potential employable clients. The thing that bothered me the most about the position was that the applicants did not take their interviews seriously. They felt that until they got the job, they wouldn’t step up their game or “show-off” for us, the middleman. What a mistake! They didn’t realize that they needed to impress me just as much as they needed to impress the client. I was their window to opportunity and unfortunately they didn’t treat it as such.

What has been the most disastrous interview you’ve done or been given? Do share.

Post from: EveryJoe

Hiring Effective Employees Isn’t Easy To Do