[blackeyeblitzar]

There were teeth, in that your own performance review (as a leader) would be affected by it. Depending on your level, your own promotion would require certain stats for your teams for it to be approved. So people made all sorts of decisions - including hiring people they shouldn’t have hired - in order to push those numbers to where they were forced to. The same happened behind closed doors on promotions.

[AndyNemmity]

That was not the case in my experience. I am learning that we all have vastly different experiences on what the implementation was, making the discussion rather difficult because we are all talking from very different vantage points.

[ColdTakes]

It would help the conversation if you expound on your experiences on implementation.

[l0t0b0r0s]

That would require the person having an actual argument instead of being a contrarian shill.

[devvvvvvv]

What exactly else did DEI initiatives do besides try to get people hired for their race instead of their competence?

[laughinghan]

In theory they try to get people hired for their competence rather than their network. A widely-cited anecdotal example of this reportedly working well is the Rooney Rule: https://www.espn.com/nfl/playoffs06/news/story?id=2750645

This thread also has a lot of anecdotal examples of failure modes of 'diverse slate' rules, though, such as people who have already decided who to hire still interviewing women candidates just to appease the rule, thus wasting everyone's time.