Is diversity in leadership valuable?

• How does Sarah Palin's nomination affect the feminist cause?
• Is tokenism ever justifiable in politics? education? business?
• How should diversity affect Yale's hiring and admissions decisions?

Some would say that we solved the question of the night fairly early. But, as everyone who has been to a YSR discussion knows, our questions are never as straightforward as they seem. After general agreement that diversity in leadership is valuable, the group went on to discuss exactly why it is valuable. Three benefits for an organization (which could also apply to a government) were 1. The benefit to public relations, i.e. it looks good to have a diverse leadership 2. The benefit to the organization in its efforts to address different groups in society, and 3. The benefits that rise from one organization setting an example to other organizations to appoint people from diverse backgrounds.

We discussed Master Lalli’s appointment as the new Master for JE, and the multitude of benefits that his appointment brings. Other case studies included applications to college, hiring security guards and principals for a high school, busing in North Carolina,

There was some discussion concerning the question of how blind we want to be. General gut reactions might often lead us to believe that in an ideal world, we might be able to remain completely blind in choosing candidates, because factors such as race and gender shouldn’t matter.

The particular type of diversity was an ongoing theme throughout the discussion. Generally, it seemed that people were of the opinion that it is not sufficient to have diversity of race or gender, but that socioeconomic background and general life experiences are extremely important. There was a question about the endurance of diversity: if you take someone from a unique culture and put him in the middle of the majority culture, will his unique perspective change so that he is more in tune with the institution?

Specifically with relation to the presidential elections, there was discussion of Palin, Clinton, and Obama. Some were concerned about voter’s reasons for supporting Clinton and Palin, specifically because there are voters who would vote for these candidates specifically (and only) because they are women. There was also discussion on the role that Palin’s gender played in McCain’s selection of his running mate.

One opinion held that America’s democracy is such that people should be allowed to choose whom they vote for, and how they decide whom they will vote for. In other words, people are free to choose whether to consider the background of each candidate. Should they choose, they can also disregard the policies of the candidate and focus solely on the background. It’s up to them.

Interesting questions that were raised but unanswered:

• Is it acceptable for an organization to hire a diverse candidate purely for a public relations advantage?
• Is it easier for people to overlook differences in race or differences in culture?
• Is diversity about everyone getting along?
• Are we trying to make everyone the same or make everyone accept differences?
• How do we feel about diversity for diversity’s sake?