Decades’
worth of studies show that a diverse workforce measurably improves decision
making, problem solving, creativity, innovation, and flexibility. But most of
us also believe that hiring, development, and compensation decisions should
come down to merit. Although the two ideas don’t seem contradictory, they’re
tough to reconcile in practice. Cognitive roadblocks keep getting in the way.
The author looks at recent books and research studies on the subject, including
Success and Luck: Good Fortune and the Myth of Meritocracy, by Robert H. Frank,
and Pedigree: How Elite Students Get Elite Jobs, by Lauren A. Rivera. Frank
points out, for example, that hindsight bias causes us to believe that random
events are predictable and to manufacture explanations for the inevitability of
our achievements. And winner-take-all markets intensify the consequences of our
cognitive shortcuts. Rivera studied hiring committees at professional services
firms that believed they were ensuring rigor and counteracting bias through group
discussions of job candidates from the school-recruitment pipeline. But those
conversations actually dampened diversity by giving negative racial, ethnic,
and gender stereotypes greater sway over decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]