A few years ago, I wrote an article on the lack of diversity at the California Solo & Small Firm Summit. I posted the article on Facebook and it sparked a lively discussion. One common theme was this: race or gender should play no role in selecting speakers because the only thing that matters is that the planning committee simply select the “best speaker.” This is a common statement whenever there is a conversation around diversity and inclusion.
Leslie Miley, a former Twitter engineer who sparked public debate for challenging the lack of diversity within the company, wrote the following shortly after leaving Twitter:
Personally, a particularly low moment was having my question about what specific steps Twitter engineering was taking to increase diversity answered by the Senior VP of Engneering at the quarterly Engineering Leadership meeting. When he responded with, “Diversity is important, but we can’t lower the bar,” I then realized I was the only African-American in Engineering leadership.
On the surface, the idea of finding the “best candidate” or not “lowering the bar” makes sense. However, who gets to come up with the criteria for determining the “best?” Often, the “best” candidate or speaker is the person who most looks like those who are in the position of making the decisions. It’s just human nature. We feel more comfortable with people who look like us, talk like us, and share similar backgrounds and values. This is part of the challenge when trying to increase diversity.
If you determine the “best” candidate by those who graduate at the top of the class at Ivy League schools, then that will necessarily mean that the group will be less diverse.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor recently spoke openly about why diversity is important on the Court’s bench. She said, “I, for one, do think there is a disadvantage from having (five) Catholics, three Jews, everyone from an Ivy League school.” She also added that several of the justices are from New York City and none of them have a background in criminal defense law outside of white-collar crime.
Sotomayor said varied backgrounds help justices to consider and understand issues differently, based on their experience. “A different perspective can permit you to more fully understand the arguments that are before you and help you articulate your position in a way that everyone will understand,” she said.
Perhaps we’ve been thinking about diversity incorrectly. Maybe the question isn’t how do we find the best candidate but rather, what are the specific skill sets, perspectives, life experiences, and personalities we want in the candidate that will make this team stronger? In the search for the “best,” the hiring or planning committees may inadvertently find others who are too similar to themselves, hence deprive the attendees, the team, or the partnership the “different perspective,” which is crucial to making the team or the conference the “best” it can be.
This article previously appeared on Above the Law.