新研究质疑 DEI 计划是否真的能提高企业盈利
New Study Calls Into Question Whether DEI Programs Really Boost Corporate Earnings

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/new-study-calls-question-whether-dei-programs-really-boost-corporate-earnings

本文讨论了围绕企业多元化、公平和包容性 (DEI) 举措的争论。 虽然有些人认为这是解决社会不平等和提高公司财务业绩的一种方式,但批评者认为这是种族主义或没有具体数据支持。 麦肯锡公司和 Inc. 杂志等来源的研究表明 DEI 具有积极的财务影响,但学者 Hand 和 Green 最近的研究质疑这些研究结果的有效性。 他们无法重现麦肯锡的研究,并得出结论:DEI 不会显着影响企业盈利。 其他学者,包括 Robin J. Ely 和 David A. Thomas,也对 DEI 强有力的研究支持的说法提出质疑。 尽管重视多样性和包容性,但人们对实现这些目标所采用的方法感到担忧,尤其是那些涉及基于种族的积极歧视的方法。 科尔曼休斯提出了另一种观点,他建议重点关注平等对待每个人,无论种族或社会经济地位如何。 著名演说家和废奴主义者弗雷德里克·道格拉斯(Frederick Douglass)强调法律面前人人平等和共同命运,与现代 DEI 努力的分裂性质形成鲜明对比。 由于财务收益可疑和道德问题,批评者建议放弃 DEI 计划。

相关文章

原文

Authored by Jonathan Miltmore via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

It’s safe to say that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is one of the more controversial ideas of our time (and a multibillion-dollar industry).

(Benjamin Child/Unsplash.com)

Some, such as Elon Musk, argue that DEI—which, definitionally speaking, means addressing structural inequalities in society—constitutes blatant racism. Others contend that DEI is simply about creating more equitable and harmonious workplaces and offers clear financial benefits to companies as well.

Study after study has proved that diverse companies perform better than their more homogeneous counterparts,” Inc. reported in 2023. “Companies that don’t foster an inclusive environment or prioritize diversity initiatives do so at their own peril.”

“Proved” is a heavy (and inaccurate) word here, but Inc. isn’t wrong about the abundance of evidence showing that DEI initiatives make companies more profitable. Between 2015 and 2023, McKinsey & Co., a multinational strategy and management consulting firm, released four separate studies showing that DEI initiatives boost corporate earnings. Unfortunately for DEI advocates, the research appears to be bunk.

A new study published in Econ Journal Watch, a semiannual peer-reviewed academic journal, shows that researchers were unable to replicate the results of all four McKinsey studies.

“Our results indicate that despite the imprimatur often given to McKinsey’s 2015, 2018, 2020, and 2023 studies, McKinsey’s studies neither conceptually ... nor empirically ... support the argument that large US public firms can expect on average to deliver improved financial performance if they increase the racial/ethnic diversity of their executives,” professors John R.M. Hand and Jeremiah Green found.

This is not the only research that shows that DEI initiatives are not the panacea for corporate earnings that supporters claim them to be. Writing in the Harvard Business Review, Robin J. Ely, a professor of business administration at Harvard, and David A. Thomas, president of Morehouse College, pointed out that “the rallying cries for more diversity in companies” are not supported “by robust research findings.”

Ms. Ely and Mr. Thomas said, “We say this as scholars who were among the first to demonstrate the potential benefits of more race and gender heterogeneity in organizations.”

The idea that all these studies showing clear financial benefits to DEI are rubbish might be shocking to some readers, but it’s a familiar academic pattern. For more than a decade, scholars and media have publicly worried about the “replication crisis” in science. It turns out that an astonishing number of findings in various fields—from psychology and economics to sociology, medicine, and beyond—fail to hold up when other researchers attempt to replicate the findings, as Vox has explained.

None of this is to say that diversity and inclusion are inherently bad, of course.

I value diversity and am an inclusive person, and I encourage others to be the same. It’s the means that we choose to achieve diversity and inclusion that is the problem, as well as that word wedged in between them: equity. To many, advancing social equity is a paramount value. Because of this, many support illiberal means (in the classical sense) to achieve this end—including supporting policies that actively discriminate on the basis of race.

Coleman Hughes, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of “The End of Race Politics,” recently appeared on “The View” and offered a better approach.

“My argument is that we should try our very best to treat people without regard to race, both in our personal lives and our public policy,” Mr. Hughes told the hosts (who accused him of being “co-opted” by the right).

He is right to say that this is the North Star that we should be aiming for: the equal treatment of all people regardless of race or class.

The great orator and abolitionist Frederick Douglass saw that such a view is the true path to progress.

In a composite nation like ours, as before the law, there should be no rich, no poor, no high, no low, no white, no black, but common country, common citizenship, equal rights, and a common destiny,” Mr. Douglass noted in a speech in 1867.

The ethos of DEI runs counter to this, which is precisely why both the concept and the industry should be scrapped. A good place to start would be to dispense with the fiction that DEI programs are a rainbow leading to a pot of gold in corporate profits.

Originally published by the Washington Examiner

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com