说明: 本篇文章选自最新一期《经济学人》的culture专栏
想获取最新外刊资源的同学,请扫描下方二维码加我微信,可直接领取最新的十几种最新外刊.
Business and the culture wars
How to cut through the cacophony over DEI
Outrage on right and left obscures both the costs of DEI and the benefits of diversity
Jan 11th 2024 |
商业与文化战争
如何穿透关于多样性、同等和包括性（DEI）的喧嚣
对右翼和左翼的愤怒掩盖了DEI的成本和多样性的好处
2024年1月11日
WHAT, IF ANYTHING, should firms do to improve the diversity of their workforce? After the murder of George Floyd in 2020, many bosses felt compelled to act. Partly out of fear of being called out for prejudice, corporate America rushed to embrace diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) schemes. By 2022 three-quarters of the S&P 500 had a chief diversity officer; more than two-fifths of listed firms set targets to increase the racial diversity of their workforce. Now many think the pendulum has swung too far.
公司到底应该采取什么措施来提升他们劳动队伍的多样性？乔治·弗洛伊德在2020年被谋杀后，许多老板感到有必要采取行动。部分出于害怕被贴上偏见的标签，美国企业急忙采纳多样性、公平和包容（DEI）计划。到了2022年，四分之三的标普500公司设立了首席多样性官职位；超过五分之二的上市公司设定了提高工作队伍种族多样性的目标。现在，许多人认为这一趋势已经过头了。
The resignation of Claudine Gay, a black woman, as president of Harvard University has ignited a broader debate about merit and identity. Bill Ackman and Elon Musk, two billionaires, have excoriated DEI for itself being discriminatory. After the Supreme Court’s landmark decision to end affirmative action in university admissions last summer, many activists and politicians increasingly have corporate DEI schemes in their sights.
哈佛大学校长克劳迪恩·盖伊是一名黑人女性，她的辞职引发了关于功绩和身份的更广泛争论。亿万富翁比尔·阿克曼和埃隆·马斯克猛烈抨击DEI本身就是种歧视。在最高法院去年夏天结束大学招生中肯定性行动（affirmative action）的里程碑式决定之后，越来越多的活动人士和政治家将企业DEI计划视为他们攻击的目标。
As America’s culture wars rage on, bosses are being caught in the middle. Progressives argue that DEI enables companies to do their bit to tackle America’s entrenched inequalities. Conservatives see it as an attack on meritocracy. One side ignores the costs of many DEI schemes, the other ignores the real benefits of diversity. How should businesses cut through the noise?
随着美国的文化战争持续激烈，老板们被夹在中间。进步派认为DEI使公司能在解决美国根深蒂固的不平等问题上做出贡献。保守派则视其为对精英制度的攻击。一方无视许多DEI计划的成本，而另一方则忽略了多样性的真正好处。企业应如何在这种喧嚣中保持清晰？
The critics are right that the thinking on DEI is muddy, and that many DEI initiatives are ineffective, even harmful. In 2015 McKinsey, a consultancy, identified a positive correlation between the gender and ethnic diversity of the workforce and firms’ profitability. Although academics have since criticised its methodology, the findings were breathlessly cited by bosses and corporate advisers, and the link was treated as causal and cast-iron. For example, from 2023 Nasdaq required firms listed on its stock exchange to have at least one board member who was not a straight white man—or explain why they do not. It was left to Jesse Fried, a professor at Harvard Law School, to point out that Nasdaq was ignoring scholarship which finds that board diversity can have a negative impact on performance.
批评者认为，对于DEI的思考是模糊的，许多DEI计划是无效甚至有害的。咨询公司麦肯锡在2015年发现员工性别和种族多样性与公司盈利性之间存在正相关性。尽管学术界后来批评了它的方法论，但这一结果被老板和企业顾问们热情引用，并被视为因果关系和确凿无疑。例如，从2023年起，纳斯达克要求在其股票交易所上市的公司至少要有一名非直男白人的董事会成员，否则就要解释为什么没有。哈佛法学院教授杰西·弗里德指出，纳斯达克忽略了研究发现，董事会的多样性可能会对业绩产生负面影响。
Diversity schemes often fail. Sometimes this betrays bad faith: firms with a discrepancy between their words and actions are often accused of “diversity washing”. Some schemes are well-meant but ineffective. Research by Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev showed that diversity training programmes fail to reduce bias. In the worst instances, DEI initiatives backfire. Targets can be seen as quotas, which undermine the principle of fair competition and cast a shadow over minorities who do well under them. Other research shows that adding equal-employment statements to job advertisements can put minority candidates off applying. No wonder support for votes on social issues at annual general meetings is draining away.
多样性计划经常失败。有时这暴露了不诚信：在言行不一致的公司常常被指责进行“多样性洗白”。有些计划出发点是好的，但却无效。弗兰克·多宾和亚历山德拉·卡莱夫的研究表明，多样性培训项目未能减少偏见。在最糟糕的情况下，DEI举措会适得其反。目标被视为配额，这破坏了公平竞争的原则，并对在这些计划下表现出色的少数族裔投下阴影。其他研究显示，在招聘广告中添加平等就业声明可能会让少数族裔候选人却步。难怪在年度股东大会上对社会问题的投票支持正在流失。
The case for diversity does not need dressing up in pseudoscience. The simple reason for businesses and their shareholders to care about recruiting people from a broad range of backgrounds is that they want the most able people. Mr Musk and Mr Ackman are both successful businessmen: they too want to assemble the best possible teams.
多样性的论点不需要用伪科学来包装。企业及其股东关心吸引来自广泛背景的人才的简单原因是，他们想要最有能力的人。马斯克先生和阿克曼先生都是成功的商人：他们也想组建最好的团队。
Opus DEI
Diversity should be a spur to looking far and wide for talent, no matter someone’s gender, race or sexual orientation. A firm convinced that it is overlooking the best candidates from a particular demographic cohort, for example, could choose to lengthen its shortlists to include more from that group. That will not mechanically create workforces that mirror the population, but it can maximise talent and diversity of thought. Quotas, by contrast, have the perverse effect of narrowing the search by excluding talent. As with so many areas touched by the culture wars, the row over DEI has become muddle-headed. The clear, simple argument for diversity is being drowned out.
多样性应成为广泛寻找人才的一个刺激因素，无论个人的性别、种族或性取向如何。例如，一个确信自己忽视了来自特定人口群体中最佳候选人的公司，可以选择延长其候选人短名单，以包含更多来自该群体的人。这不会机械地创造出反映人口结构的劳动力队伍，但它可以最大限度地发掘人才和思维多样性。相比之下，配额有着扭曲的效果，通过排除人才来缩小搜索范围。就像许多被文化战争触及的领域一样，关于DEI的争论变得混乱。多样性明确、简单的论点被淹没了。
继续阅读
阅读原文