As someone who hires people, I think this is a double-edge sword.
Bluntly, without a sustained effort by managers, teams will default to hiring people who are as most "like them" as possible. Shared interests, vernacular, professional personas, etc.
That's generally going to mean a lot of very homogenous teams, and in tech, that means very white, potentially very male.
On the other side, I have a distaste for DEI being made so prominent as to make anyone feel their job wasn't earned. Which is never, ever the case. Unqualified people don't hired. Poor performers get let go. But given the subjectivity of the hiring process – there exist no objective metrics for the vast majority of jobs – you just HAVE to tip the scales sometimes.
But it seems an impossible line to walk. If you keep it quiet, staff isn't aware of what you're doing, and may think you're doing nothing at all. That has a cost too.
Bluntly, without a sustained effort by managers, teams will default to hiring people who are as most "like them" as possible. Shared interests, vernacular, professional personas, etc.
That's generally going to mean a lot of very homogenous teams, and in tech, that means very white, potentially very male.
On the other side, I have a distaste for DEI being made so prominent as to make anyone feel their job wasn't earned. Which is never, ever the case. Unqualified people don't hired. Poor performers get let go. But given the subjectivity of the hiring process – there exist no objective metrics for the vast majority of jobs – you just HAVE to tip the scales sometimes.
But it seems an impossible line to walk. If you keep it quiet, staff isn't aware of what you're doing, and may think you're doing nothing at all. That has a cost too.