[jquery]

By that logic, any criticism of hiring methods means you view the current crop of employees as inferior.

Is saying "we need more diversity" code for "white men are inferior"? You might be on to something.

[cfelix]

Not exactly, preferring a diverse group over a homogeneous one doesn't mean that the individuals of the homogeneous group are inferior.

If the goal is to have a diverse group then a group composed only of women isn't ideal either. Diversity is not about raising or lowering the bar.

[literallycancer]

What if I prefer a homogeneous group then? It doesn't mean that diverse individuals are any worse, does it?

[cfelix]

Of course not! I just don't know why someone would want that.

[literallycancer]

If I ran a debt collecting agency, I'd probably choose men with a Russian-sounding accent over any other group.

[meric]

For a genetic study of prevalence of a genetic condition in Chinese males, you'd want a homogenous group of Chinese males.

[cfelix]

I was referring about hiring people, not studying them. But I can't say you're wrong.

[meric]

If we really dig for an example - mountain climbing guides for Mount Everest, certain groups of people have evolutionary advantages that make them more suited for the job.

In an extreme environment where advantages of the tail end of population distributions are important then it's less likely the market will choose a diversified workforce.