Meritocracy vs. Diversity....is there a right answer?

EyeVeee
Fri, 10 May 2019 15:56:08 +0000

Harvard is in trouble because it put diversity before meritocracy, Buffett does not.

The value judgments of the two may not be all that different, but Harvard is trapped by having to share an enormous dataset that a BOD doesn’t have.

Buffett saying that he hires the best may well include diversity, we don’t know. What he freely states it’s not THE driver. Harvard subtly argues something very similar. The difference is a measurement component that suggests “unfairness”. Harvard is being sued because statistically, groups can argue they are not admitting the “best” (by the numbers). Buffett isn’t hiring the smartest people on the planet, he’s hiring what he feels is the best person to deliver value. Harvard will argue (I think) that picking someone with background A and a 1450 SAT builds a stronger community than picking another person with background B and 1580. The second person says “my measurables are better, thus I’m being discriminated against”.

I think you can argue they are both doing what they feel is best for the organization. Best may include meeting regulated, financial, and cultural requirements. When you tell 95 people out of 100 you don’t want them in your club, you’re going to make a lot of people unhappy.