* It reduces the number of those moments where you do something stupid and insensitive because a bunch of identical-looking people all nodded and said "Sure, I don't see any problems with that".
* It not only increases the talent pool, but gives that new talent a reason to think that they'll actually be accepted because there are already some faces like theirs.
* You get new perspectives on user needs and potential markets.
As, you say, it's easy to do it wrong. But the self-fulfilling prophecy where people hire those who look like themselves -- and then conclude that people who look like that must be the most successful -- is always going to make certain mistakes over and over. Always with the same shrug and "Well, what are you gonna do?"
How does racially-biased hiring address that other than just placing unproductive workers into roles they are not qualified for, with flow-on negative impacts to the rest of the company and society?
Why is it that migrants from poor countries like Ghana, Nigeria outperform African Americans, when those migrants have no connections or local advantages?
It would seem to me that there are fundamental cultural problems in some ethnic groups in the US (eg. father absence, 'acting white' meme) that if addressed would actually yield improvements. Deciding not to hire White or Asian workers at Google does not - instead it diminishes the achievement or any Black or Hispanic worker who was hired based on their actual capability instead of just their skin color.
This is economics 101.
2) The poster I replied to stated that lower labor costs were the primary goal - and I refuted that. You seem to think I am stating something I am not.
Wait, are you saying there has not been a push among corporations to increase diversity?
>In 2003, MIT professor Thomas Kochan noted that companies were spending an estimated $8 billion a year on diversity efforts. But since Trump’s election, and with the emergence of movements like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter, the industry has exploded. A 2019 survey of 234 companies in the S&P 500 found that 63% of the diversity professionals had been appointed or promoted to their roles during the past three years. In March 2018, the job site Indeed reported that postings for diversity and inclusion professionals had risen 35% in the previous two years.
People who ignore how large their competition was to begin with tend to develop terminal exceptionalism.
This isn't even a strawman in this case, since the company in question is literally cutting pay to its workers for the sake of minorities.
The capitalists are very good at starting a race war to keep workers from uniting.