(UN)Popular Opinion: Don't Be Fooled By MEI

If you’re considering abandoning or replacing your DEI initiatives with MEI, I encourage you to take a deep breath and pause. We are in a dangerous and volatile political and social cycle. Remaining level-headed and avoiding impulsive decisions will be crucial to surviving this without negatively affecting your business.?

In a previous article, I shared my perspective on human resources and DEI and why they shouldn’t be in charge of overseeing it. Today, I’ll go a level deeper and offer and introduce my practical (non-emotional) perspective on MEI and why some organizations are going about this all wrong.?

MEI is a politically motivated distraction.

Standing for Merit, Excellence and Intelligence, it blatantly attempts to eliminate the need for diversity. Its entire argument against DEI is based on the premise that diverse candidates lack merit, excellence and intelligence. Aside from being absent of unbiased reasoning, it’s tone-deaf and misses the point. More importantly, it’s fear-based. I believe the fear is that diverse candidates are/will take “white” jobs.?

Here’s something to consider: there are no “white” jobs and no “black” jobs. There are jobs.??

Should qualifications be a deciding factor? Without question–yes.

Should merit be sacrificed for the sake of diversity? Absolutely not.?

Do diverse candidates lack intelligence and excellence? Some do, sure.?

However, to suggest that you can’t have diversity, inclusion, merit, excellence and intelligence in one candidate is absurd. This implies that there are only two choices: hire someone of color or hire an intelligent individual.?But you can't have both.

Where does this thought come from, and how did we get to this point?

The last four years have led us to this divisive reasoning, which is precisely why I argue that HR should not oversee DEI. We have seen countless situations where candidates were placed in positions they weren’t qualified for. Receptionists were promoted to Directors of Diversity; entry-level skilled employees were hired as supervisors or managers. We’ve seen it all.

But here’s an interesting fact–that didn’t start in 2020, and diverse candidates haven’t been the only individuals hired for roles for which they lacked the “merit, excellence or intelligence.” While in corporate, most of the people I reported to–all white- weren’t qualified for their positions. They knew the right people or filled a quota. I left corporate because of this standard practice, as have many others of all races and genders.?

That’s right. Promoting or hiring based on connection, increasing “diversity” numbers, or quid pro quo is nothing new. And if we're bing honest, since the 1990s, white women have benefited the most from the "demand for diversity.”

We’re talking nearly 30 years, which tells us what? The system is the issue. The system needs an overhaul. However, none of this changes the fact that true diversity is good for business. So is inclusion.?

Consider that DEI was designed by people people–not business people. MEI is spearheaded by threatened people–not people people or business people. They might claim to be business-centered, but if they were, they’d see the revenue, reputation and retention benefits of DEI. Either way, both are missing the point.

Diversity is a business problem, but it is also a people solution.

Diverse perspectives are desperately needed. Otherwise, we will remain where we are now–with a group of people who believe merit, excellence, and inclusion are new and see this as an opportunity to fix a problem they think started in the last few years.?Or that diversity, equity and inclusion are limited to hiring based on race and gender.

Merit and intelligence are undoubtedly necessary in business, as are diversity and inclusion. Suggesting that diversity requires sacrificing the two or that it doesn't matter as long as you hire a diverse candidate proves that neither of these groups should oversee something as critical to business success.?

People people (HR) will look at the “people” in the problem and address it accordingly. “Boards are made up of all middle-aged white men, so we need more women and people of color.” They’ll read employee feedback that says they feel left out or need to express themselves and respond by creating 25 ERGs (employee resource groups). While MEI will assume the only reason a person of color was hired is because of their skin color. Neither address the business problems as a whole and, therefore, don’t necessarily solve anything.?Who's thinking about the competitive advantage and customer problem-solving diversity provides?

Look at Tractor Supply’s epic fail . They went all in on DEI, created a program, and, a few months ago, were hiring DEI Managers nationwide. Because their initiatives weren’t fully aligned with their business goals, they were an easy target for special interest groups (and individuals) to attack and without pushback, they crumbled. Publicly announcing they’re backing down from DEI, they pissed off customers who supported and patronized them because of the shared values in their DEI commitments.?All tof this could have been handled so differently. Now, they're another company that mucked up DEI and gave it a bad rep.

If nothing else, let Tractor Supply be an example of why DEI must align with your business. Backtracking damages credibility, and boycotts are bad for business. So, if MEI has your attention, it’s worth examining your current DEI policies to ensure they aren’t setting your organization up for similar challenges down the road.?

Don't abandon your initiatives, align them with your business instead.

#MEI #DEI #TractorSupply #Woke #Antiwoke #NOstrategy #Crisiscommunication #ProBusiness #Inclusion #Backfire #BadDecisions #Alignment #Boycott #Reputation #Values