I agree with Mark that this metric is a little screwy. In addition to suggesting a quota system, this metric is really difficult to implement. For example, given our current application procedures, applicants do not identify their ethnicity on their application, and it’s impossible for hiring officials to know the ethnicity of [all/any/each of] their applicants. It seems unfair to our hiring officials to expect them to increase their staff diversity, while tying their hands on making those selections.

I also think that this metric does our diverse applicants an enormous disservice. At ”best,” it reinforces the misunderstanding that we have to somehow ”lower” our standards to attract diverse talent. At worst, it creates a hostile work environment where a culturally diverse individual is made to feel subpar (i.e. ”you only got this job because…”).

We need to change the metric, and reward field stations who create a culture for diversity. Instead of measuring success by how many diverse individuals we can bring on board, how about measuring success by the level of effort expended to foster diversity? How well does a field station recruit diverse talent? How well do they cultivate diverse talent (i.e. retain) at their location? I’d rather measure success qualitatively than quantitatively!