Dr. Jonathan Ashong-Lamptey的动态

Here's a breakdown of the the first McKinsey Report : https://podcast.elementofinclusion.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-famous-mckinsey-report-why-diversity-matters-report-breakdown/

Here's a breakdown of the the second McKinsey Report https://podcast.elementofinclusion.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-delivering-through-diversity-the-follow-up-study-to-the-famous-mckinsey-report-report-breakdown/

I think that McKinsey have hurt their reputation with this one. McKinsey are like Volkswagen - VW have famously been training on the reliability and build quality of their Mk 2 Golf and Polos from the 1980s for the last 40 years, even though subsequent reliability figures don't back this up. McKinsey are very used to being the 'go-to' Rolls Royce consultancy - engaged by Prime Ministers and CEOs of FTSE100s. And you are correct Dr. Jonathan Ashong-Lamptey there is lots of what my granny would have called 'pish and wind' - selling the headlines and rarely if ever is there a sound business case. In fact, since we spoke last year, I have seen half a dozen EDI policies that were justified using McKinsey's report which had no business case, no metrics, no commercial case, no risk analysis report. But the boards nodded these through with the 'well I don't want to question this because I'll be attacked and besides, McKinsey say its good so it must me'

This is what happens when you substitute "Equality of Outcome", via quotas and similar, to the intended "Equality of Opportunity" as enshrined in the Equality Act of 2010. It failed because some people just couldn't accept that there might be valid reasons for observed differences in outcomes that had explanations other than sex and/or ethnicity. I believe in exceptions for people with some of physical or mental impairment but not just because of someone's sex or colour of their skin in the absence of anything else. People should not manipulate outcomes and instead understand the reasons for the current outcomes, as to do other wise will not solve any other underlying causes.

Dr. Jonathan Ashong-Lamptey the irony here of course is the heterogeneous groups on their own do NOT improve business outcomes. Where there is no INCLUSION, homogeneous groups outperform diverse ones, and so Diversity shouldn't be the priority anyway. Managing the risks of underrepresentation alongside the opportunities of inclusive strategies yes, but not "Diversity" on its own as suggested here.

They have an ongoing Women in the Workplace Report. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/women-in-the-workplace

Such an interesting perspective! You make a really valid point about McKinsey's role in shaping the diversity conversation. It’s clear their reports have been influential, but it's also crucial for every organization to define its own DEI strategy rather than relying on broad, one-size-fits-all solutions. Looking forward to diving deeper into your article and exploring your thoughts!

McKinsey also teams up with Lean in to do an Annual Women in the Workplace report and that has been equally or even more influential than the reports you list. They have shifted the gender diversity conversation in corporate. I know I have relied heavily on reading these reports yearly. I’m totally in support of their stance and I get the point you are making. ?

Dr. Jonathan Ashong-Lamptey, having read many of McKinsey's reports with key data points and quantifiable results, it'd be curious to know if they did an about-face, how they stand on being "research driven" and "accelerate inclusive growth".

You hit the nail on the head with, "McKinsey & Company understand their business case for diversity." It would be a mistake for us to champion their stance without understanding the why behind it.