Leser Ronald verweist auf interessante Studie die Diversität und den Erfolg des Unternehmens betreffen:
Aus einem Artikel dazu:
Is diversity our strength? Our leaders certainly seem to think so. And many multinational corporations are of the same mind. In a series of influential reports with cringeworthy titles like ‘Diversity Wins’, researchers at McKinsey have put forward the officious-sounding “business case for diversity”. In short, they claim that more ‘diverse’ management leads to better company performance.
(…)
Enter Jeremiah Green and John Hand – two U.S. economists who tried to replicate McKinsey’s findings. In a new paper published in Econ Journal Watch, they summarise what they found.
To begin with, McKinsey would not provide Green and Hand with their data. Nor would they even share the names of the relevant firms. (This is obviously bad scientific practice on McKinsey’s part.) Hence the authors decided to focus on public U.S. companies in the S&P 500 – a sample that likely overlaps substantially with the one used by McKinsey. They also used data from the same pre-Covid time window.
What did the authors find? McKinsey’s “business case for diversity” is built on sand.
Their main finding is shown below. Each chart plots company performance from 2015–2019 on the y-axis against executive ‘diversity’ in 2020 on the x-axis. The left-hand chart uses eight racial categories to calculate diversity, while the right-hand chart uses five. In both cases, there is zero association between the two variables: companies with more executive ‘diversity’ do not perform better than those with less.
Diversity und wirtschaftlicher Erfolg
McKinsey hat also vermutlich eine politische Studie gemacht, die allerdings nicht replizierbar ist. Und damit geht die Diversitätstheorie nicht wirklich auf. Das dürfte auch daran liegen, dass der Ansatz „Diversität nach verschiedenen Hautfarben“ weniger effektiv ist als der Ansatz „Diversität bestimmter Fachrichtungen und Lebenserfahrungen unabhängig von der Hautfarbe“. Wenn dann noch Diversität unabhängig von Qualifikation gefördert wird, wie es sich in diesem Bericht aus Google darstellt, wird es eher nachteilig sein.
And as Green and Hand point out, there’s an additional problem with McKinsey’s argument. Even if company performance was associated with executive ‘diversity’, that wouldn’t prove the latter causes the former. After all, it could be the other around: perhaps companies that perform better can afford the luxury of greater executive diversity.
Das wurde hier auch schon diskutiert und ich finde es gar nicht so unwahrscheinlich. Wenn das Geschäft schlecht läuft wird man eher auf Effektivität achten und vielleicht auch die Leute rausschmeißen, die uneffektiv sind oder schlechte Leistungen liefern. Das soll ja gegenwärtig auch schon teilweise passieren, es gab Meldungen darüber, dass DEI-Abteilungen aufgelöst werden.
Hier die Studie:
In contrast to the equivocal findings in academic research, “the business case for diversity” is the dominant rhetorical paradigm for how U.S. corporations debate actions and policies around racial/ethnic diversity. In this paper, we conduct an empirical test of the paradigm by gathering data on the race/ethnicity of the individuals shown on the leadership pages of S&P 500 firms’ websites as of mid-2011, 2014, 2017, 2020 and 2021, and then determining if any of nine measures of the racial/ethnic diversity of these executives reliably predict cross-sectional variation in any of six measures of their firms’ financial performance over the next fiscal year. We do not find reliable evidence that they do. As such, our results do not support the “business case for diversity” when the claim is assessed using 1-year-ahead financial performance metrics and multiple measures of the race/ethnicity of S&P 500 executives over the last decade.
Quelle: Does Greater Diversity in Executive Race/Ethnicity Reliably Predict Better Future Firm Financial Performance?
In a separate paper co-authored with Sekou Bermiss, the economists show that nine measures of executive ‘diversity’ do not predict any of six measures of company performance in the next financial year. So their null result appears to be very consistent.
Das wäre diese Studie hier:
In a series of very influential studies, McKinsey (2015; 2018; 2020; 2023) reports finding statistically significant positive relations between the industry-adjusted earnings before interest and taxes margins of global McKinsey-chosen sets of large public firms and the racial/ethnic diversity of their executives. However, when we revisit McKinsey’s tests using data for firms in the publicly observable S&P 500® as of 12/31/2019, we do not find statistically significant relations between McKinsey’s inverse normalized Herfindahl-Hirschman measures of executive racial/ethnic diversity at mid-2020 and either industry-adjusted earnings before interest and taxes margin or industry-adjusted sales growth, gross margin, return on assets, return on equity, and total shareholder return over the prior five years 2015–2019. Combined with the erroneous reverse-causality nature of McKinsey’s tests, our inability to quasi-replicate their results suggests that despite the imprimatur given to McKinsey’s studies, they should not be relied on to support the view that US publicly traded firms can expect to deliver improved financial performance if they increase the racial/ethnic diversity of their executives.
Quelle: McKinsey’s Diversity Matters/Delivers/Wins Results Revisited
Green and Hand have not conclusively falsified the claim that more ‘diverse’ management leads to better company performance; that would require studies that can get around the problem of reverse-causality mentioned above. Nonetheless, they have shown that evidence supporting the “business case for diversity” in fact does no such thing.
Es hätte mich auch überrascht, wenn es wirklich Vorteile gebracht hätte.
vgl auch:
Gefällt mir Wird geladen …
Alles Evolution 