Finding Merit

I think I've figure out where we're going wrong when it comes to diversity in the workplace. I saw this article the other day. The headline didn't surprise me, I've heard this before. I've heard people being referred to as "the diversity hire". I've had guys in tech say to me that they'd hire women "if they were qualified". The concern here is that the person being hired does not have the same or similar abilities as the current team members, and was just hired to check the box of a company policy. The problem is, we don't need people with the SAME skills as the current team. We need people with DIFFERENT skills, experiences, values etc. to gain the financial and efficiency benefits of diversity.
 
In the past, people were hired based on experience, or years in a similar role. For example, we're hiring someone with 10 years experience and these qualifications. It was expected that the person coming in knew what needed to be done, with maybe just some training on internal procedures. They would already have the knowledge, and would take very little time to get used to the new position. Now that work experience and qualifications is still relevant for specialised roles, I don't want me brain surgeon to be winging it with google, but in the age of AI? Where every job is moving at a million miles an hour?
 
As businesses become smarter, they are starting to realise that hiring using skills, and introducing different skills into a team was a good thing! Having someone with a different style could improve the culture. That person who thinks outside the box was helping solve problems. The benefits went on. Did they communicate that with the rest of the team though? Did the team know that hiring a woman with limited experience was not a "diversity hire", but that it was introducing new skills into the team? Shouldn't we be working as a team, leaning on each other for their strengths and offering our to help others.
 
I think this is where we fell down. The data about diversity proves the benefits, and leaders who hire for diversity know that, but do their teams? Are the skills of the new hire valued and appreciated? Or is the team left wondering why this person was hired, was it because of some woke new policy? The definition of merit includes being worthy or deserving. What they really mean the situation in the article though, and the many conversations I've heard or been a part of over the years, is 'are their skills the same as mine'? My skills are what is required to be good at this job, because I am good at my job.
 
It's time to give merit to skills that are not necessarily earned with a degree. Like being an analogical thinker, for example, something a person might just be naturally good at. I've got over 40 years experience in analogical thinking! I can't really explain it, but give me two seemingly unrelated datasets and I'll probably be able to find a pattern or way to integrate them. Imagine if I joined a team of software engineers (I am not a software engineer), and the team lead explained that I could help them with integration of the data in the systems they design and build. I wouldn't be the female "diversity hire", I'd be a woman with skills that can help them. Diversity is about how our differences come together. You can't build a strong wall with only bricks and no mortar.
 
So we want to hire a diverse team for the business benefits, but first, we need to figure out why, what skills will help the team flourish, and talk to the team about why. I'm my example I would have been hired on merit. Not on how I ranked against the other team members on their skills. My worth would be valued because I could offer something they needed. So figure out what you need in your teams, and hire for those skills. Talk to your team about how we need people who think differently to us, to be even more successful. That engineering team probably needed numbers and stats to be convinced, but you get the point. Let's start giving merit to all the skills!