Chief of Naval Operations, Secretary of the Navy
Chief of Naval Operations, Secretary of the Navy
Posted on Sep 26, 2021
Gilday outlines goal for Navy to become the most diverse service
457
10
6
1
1
0
Diversity
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
3
3
0
My take: Bad goal.
IMHO, diversity should be embraced, encouraged, and NEVER shunned. And I also applaud Gilday's focus on diversity beyond race and gender - backgrounds and experiences, as well. BUT...
When we make diversity a GOAL, especially when we make it a COMPETITIVE goal (more diverse, most diverse), then we encourage tokenism. We encourage recruiters to try and look for superficial qualities - gender, skin color, single family homes, zip codes, etc. - rather than character and competence. And we encourage senior leaders and service chiefs to promote based on those same qualities. After all, we can't have the "most diverse" Navy if EVERY demographic is not only represented within the ranks, but represented at the top, as well. Character and competence will still matter, sure. But a focus on diversity makes these take a back seat to how many (and which) "boxes" a candidate can check off.
Don't make diversity a goal. Make it a hoped-for byproduct. The goal should be universal respect and acceptance. The goal should be recognizing, recruiting, and promoting character and competence, REGARDLESS of the package. If these are the goals, then diversity will probably follow. But if it doesn't, and the service is meeting those goals of respect, acceptance, recruitment, and promotion, then we should all be OK with that. Because the Navy's job isn't to be diverse, it is to be lethal.
IMHO, diversity should be embraced, encouraged, and NEVER shunned. And I also applaud Gilday's focus on diversity beyond race and gender - backgrounds and experiences, as well. BUT...
When we make diversity a GOAL, especially when we make it a COMPETITIVE goal (more diverse, most diverse), then we encourage tokenism. We encourage recruiters to try and look for superficial qualities - gender, skin color, single family homes, zip codes, etc. - rather than character and competence. And we encourage senior leaders and service chiefs to promote based on those same qualities. After all, we can't have the "most diverse" Navy if EVERY demographic is not only represented within the ranks, but represented at the top, as well. Character and competence will still matter, sure. But a focus on diversity makes these take a back seat to how many (and which) "boxes" a candidate can check off.
Don't make diversity a goal. Make it a hoped-for byproduct. The goal should be universal respect and acceptance. The goal should be recognizing, recruiting, and promoting character and competence, REGARDLESS of the package. If these are the goals, then diversity will probably follow. But if it doesn't, and the service is meeting those goals of respect, acceptance, recruitment, and promotion, then we should all be OK with that. Because the Navy's job isn't to be diverse, it is to be lethal.
(3)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
Agree to disagree. It will never be diversity over character and competence. That's just not how promotion and retention work in the Navy.
What this will most likely look like is making the Navy more appealing to a wider variety of people. Recent (last 6ish years) examples include the Navy allowing hairstyles (like locks) that protect naturally kinky hair, and allowing men to wear earrings while not on duty. If the Navy continues to modernize it's standards, it will continue to be more inclusive and appealing to a larger variety of people and making it less of a burden to remain in the Navy. Half my reason for wanting to leave the Navy are simple things around personal appearance.
What this will most likely look like is making the Navy more appealing to a wider variety of people. Recent (last 6ish years) examples include the Navy allowing hairstyles (like locks) that protect naturally kinky hair, and allowing men to wear earrings while not on duty. If the Navy continues to modernize it's standards, it will continue to be more inclusive and appealing to a larger variety of people and making it less of a burden to remain in the Navy. Half my reason for wanting to leave the Navy are simple things around personal appearance.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
PO1 (Join to see) - It's how recruiting, retention, and promotion work EVERYWHERE.
If the boss says that (s)he wants to see diversity, and diversity is part of the scorecard, then diversity WILL BE FOUND, by hook or by crook. Again, I am not saying that character and competence will be chucked out the door, but they will not be the MOST important factors anymore.
Top tier colleges don't have quotas, because quotas would be unConstitutional. But they *do* have "diversity goals." They are allowed to - and do - make admissions decisions which include race as part of a "total candidate evaluation." And they routinely turn away candidates who are *more qualified* in order to take in *less qualified* diversity applicants. I am not saying those diversity applicants are *not* rigorous applicants or that they do *not* possess the skills or attributes necessary to succeed. But all of the metrics (GPA, academic rigor, class standing, SAT scores, extra-curriculars, etc.) the school looks for are then filtered through which diversity boxes a student can check. And less qualified candidates are accepted while more qualified candidates are wait-listed or outright rejected.
Yes, I know that the Navy is not a University. But, quite frankly, HR is HR. When the boss tells folks that diversity is part of the scorecard, then this *will* impact the decisions on who to hire, who to retain, and who to promote. Almost everyone wants a good grade, and therefore they do the things the boss says are necessary for that good grade. If Person A is the *best* candidate, but person B is a *very good* candidate, and will make a leader look better to the boss, then Person B gets the job/promotion 75% of the time. Not all of the time, but enough.
Finally, if vanity is *that* high on a person's list that personal appearance is a make or break for entering / continued service, then they probably need not apply, anyway.
If the boss says that (s)he wants to see diversity, and diversity is part of the scorecard, then diversity WILL BE FOUND, by hook or by crook. Again, I am not saying that character and competence will be chucked out the door, but they will not be the MOST important factors anymore.
Top tier colleges don't have quotas, because quotas would be unConstitutional. But they *do* have "diversity goals." They are allowed to - and do - make admissions decisions which include race as part of a "total candidate evaluation." And they routinely turn away candidates who are *more qualified* in order to take in *less qualified* diversity applicants. I am not saying those diversity applicants are *not* rigorous applicants or that they do *not* possess the skills or attributes necessary to succeed. But all of the metrics (GPA, academic rigor, class standing, SAT scores, extra-curriculars, etc.) the school looks for are then filtered through which diversity boxes a student can check. And less qualified candidates are accepted while more qualified candidates are wait-listed or outright rejected.
Yes, I know that the Navy is not a University. But, quite frankly, HR is HR. When the boss tells folks that diversity is part of the scorecard, then this *will* impact the decisions on who to hire, who to retain, and who to promote. Almost everyone wants a good grade, and therefore they do the things the boss says are necessary for that good grade. If Person A is the *best* candidate, but person B is a *very good* candidate, and will make a leader look better to the boss, then Person B gets the job/promotion 75% of the time. Not all of the time, but enough.
Finally, if vanity is *that* high on a person's list that personal appearance is a make or break for entering / continued service, then they probably need not apply, anyway.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google