I think meaning of the term diversity is often twisted into a binary outcome. If a company is 65% white and 35% Chinese is that more diverse than a company that is 70% white, 10% Chinese, 10% Indian, and 10% Vietnamese?
Often, the above two examples would be flattened to just 35% or 30% Asian. But even my example is very reductive - China, for example, has many dozens of ethnic groups.
I think 'diversity' is a very hard thing to quantify, which makes it more difficult to measure the effectiveness of initiatives to increase diversity.
Can anyone point me towards better methods of measuring diversity? If society or a particular organization wishes to increase diversity, it seems important to be able to measure it with more nuance.
What would an ideal algorithm for quantifying diversity look like?
It also ignores the most important diversity, which is diversity of thought. Having ten employees of ten different races who all think the same is hardly diversity.
EDIT: Getting downvoted by the 'diversity' crowd I see :)
In my corporate experience, I have only seen people care about diversity based on irrelevant characteristics (race, gender, etc). Nobody wants diversity of thought.
An example that I expect will get me in trouble: when a woman exhibits traditionally masculine characteristics at work - assertiveness etc, it can get looked at badly. And people say "oh well if a man did that, it would be ok", and use it as an example of sexism. I like working with women, and I reject any notion of stereotypes about how a woman should act, but a woman acting the same as the other male douchebags doesn't add any diversity, she's just another annoying person I have to manage. I'd rather have someone bring a unique and different temperament to work, which could even include being helpful and caring instead of combative with a chip on their shoulder. So maybe if people want to be valued for the diversity of their contributions, they should actually act "diverse" and not conform to the lowest common denominator of corporate behavior.
The irony of Corporate America's diversity programs is that they appreciate diversity of thought except for those that disagree with them. Then, they suddenly don't care about you and your thoughts.
Often, the above two examples would be flattened to just 35% or 30% Asian. But even my example is very reductive - China, for example, has many dozens of ethnic groups.
I think 'diversity' is a very hard thing to quantify, which makes it more difficult to measure the effectiveness of initiatives to increase diversity.
Can anyone point me towards better methods of measuring diversity? If society or a particular organization wishes to increase diversity, it seems important to be able to measure it with more nuance.
What would an ideal algorithm for quantifying diversity look like?