“Qualified” is a minimum.
I know that, y’all don’t. What’s Merit to you may not be Merit to me. What’s diverse to you may not be diverse to me.
That’s what makes these discussions kind of silly. MOST QUALIFIED is subjective.
Hiring managers know the spectrum for their crafts.
Why bring “merit” into a discussion about hiring?
Race or gender?
I honestly do not understand your question.
We actually have agreement there.
I’ve been in a situation where a half dozen or so candidates are neck and neck. Subjectively, I would pick 2 or 3 for a second interview with my technical team. Their input would go a long way in making my final decision. Technical competence is only part of the equation. How well they would work with the rest of my team was more important.
1 Like
Can you Show me one company who has emphasized hiring for diversity over hiring the most “qualified.”
I was thinking more of government hires than I was private sector hires.
Merit has nothing to do with hiring. Merit has to do with retention.
Hmmm. I can agree it would be more likely to happen In the government. Still don’t see the incentive for it.
Calgov
Votes.
The fire department even did a video for it.
I disagree. I see merit as “most deserving for reward or opportunity”
You can certainly have the most deserving candidate for hire.
Back to the bonus aspect. If I’m head of a government department and my bonus centers on the latest diversity goals, you can bet I will meet those goals. As to the consequences, since when has the government been accountable for actual results?
2 Likes
This part is why I could see this in the government vs private industry.
1 Like
Then you don’t know what you’re talking about and shouldn’t be a “hiring” manager.
2 Likes
Mmmmmm
1 Like
Extremely gross mismanagement. 
3 Likes
Yes…
