White men rewarded for promoting ‘diversity’; women and non-whites considered selfish for same

24 Jul


Dedication to diversity can be a liability in the workplace, according to a new study.

Researchers at the University of Colorado found that women and non-whites executives who push for women and non-whites to be hired and promoted suffer when it comes to their own performance reviews. A woman who shepherds women up the ranks, for example, is perceived as less warm, while a non-white who promotes diversity is perceived as less competent. Both end up being rated less highly by their bosses, according to the paper, which is set to be presented at an Academy of Management conference next month.

“Women can lean in and try to bridge the confidence gap all they want, but they’re going to be penalized for advocating for other women, just like non-whites are,” said David Hekman, an author of the study and an assistant professor of management at the University of Colorado’s Leeds School of Business.

Often, having women or minorities atop a company is perceived as a marker of progress for diversity efforts, but Hekman’s research suggests their presence might not have a large impact on the rest of the organization. If they believe it’s too risky to advocate for their own groups, it makes sense that successful women and non-white leaders would end up surrounded by white males in the executive suite, he said.


White men, on the other hand, actually got a bump in their performance review scores from valuing diversity, he added.

The researchers also conducted an experiment where actors, playing company leaders, gave a speech advocating for their firms to hire someone who either looked like them or did not look like them. When female actors read from a pro-diversity script, study participants rated them as colder, and when non-white actors read from a pro-diversity script, they were rated as less competent.

Hekman said he believes the negative stereotyping is a result of perceived self-interest.

“People are perceived as selfish when they advocate for someone who looks like them, unless they’re a white man,” he said.

Unintended consequences

Or are they?

I mean, it could be an ingenious way for the Cathedral to ensure that upper management remains much the same as it ever was, provided everyone pays lip service to proper SWPL prog ideology, of course…

Meet the new boss; same as the old boss…

In which case, then, the Jizzabellers bitching about this would merely be useful idiots, tools of the Establishment playing shrieking extremists, while Alpha white men promoting diversity would look moderate by comparison…


9 responses to “White men rewarded for promoting ‘diversity’; women and non-whites considered selfish for same

  1. James and the Giant Peach

    July 24, 2014 at 1:06 am

    I can’t seem to find the link to the study in any of those blogs so I could look at the numbers and methodologies more closely without the usual media spin on things.

    “Hekman and two colleagues examined a pool of 362 executives, including CEOs, vice president and directors from industries like banking, consumer products and food. ”

    It says they were reviewed by their bosses. Who are the bosses? The shareholders? How did they get comprehensive reviews from all of them willingly? It doesn’t specify anything at all.

    Personally I’m fine with diversity in a corporation. I am not fine with diversity of skill. If the white man can clearly do the job better, just give him the job. If the trans queer mexican buddhist woman man can do a better job then hire “it”. The point of a company is to make money, and they will gladly hire the TQMBWM if it does a better job. But most of the cases this isn’t true. What they argue, when they say they want diversity in the workplace, is they want other sexes and races to be held to a lower standard yet STILL get the job.

    In other words the devil in the details is that they are arguing for diversity of skill not diversity of persons. Pro-diversity people have intentions for the former hidden by the language of the latter.

  2. Will S.

    July 24, 2014 at 1:31 am

    I’m the same way. Hire the best individuals for the job, regardless of sex, race, etc.

    And don’t try to meet quotas, reserving 50% of jobs for women, etc., because then such considerations will take precedence over skills…

    Of course, progs want that, as you say, to allow hiring people less talented just to meet some bean counters’ notion of ‘justice’…

    Yeah, the reporting was a bit sloppy, not giving us enough information about the study…

  3. infowarrior1

    July 24, 2014 at 5:45 am

    @Will S.

    What do you say of all-male businesses?

  4. sfcton

    July 24, 2014 at 7:15 am

    Any White man who pushes for diversity is a traitor to his kin, blood and soil

  5. Will S.

    July 24, 2014 at 9:33 am

    @ infowarrior1: Sure, why not? I’m for allowing companies the freedom to choose to hire whoever they want, for whatever reason. If I had a company, I would not necessarily limit those who I hired to only men; see what I said to James. But I couldn’t care less if other companies choose to only hire men, or whites, or straight people. That’s their business, IMO. Not mine. (And it’s their business, not mine. 🙂 )

    @ sfcton: SWPLs are.

  6. infowarrior1

    July 25, 2014 at 3:30 am

  7. sfcton

    July 25, 2014 at 7:11 am

    lol after 25 years I finally got secretary. 1st girl I’ve ever worked with. She’s a good girl and knows her place

  8. Will S.

    July 25, 2014 at 8:50 am

    @ infowarrior1: As do I… I will amend what I said earlier; I think I would have to decide, if I were a boss, whether, depending on how small or large my organization was, whether I thought my company would benefit from the social cohesion of homogeneity, or whether that was less of a factor, if the organization were too large for much of that, anyway, and whether it made more sense to simply go with purely whoever I felt could do each task best, without regards to their sex, etc.

    @ sfcton: Women make excellent secretaries.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s