No non-diverse hire at Aviva without it being signed off by the CEO

The issue is that diversity can only apply to a group. It can’t be an individual attribute.

Exactly.

And all individuals are have protected characteristics, even if they are part of a majority, or indeed elite, group.

People in their minds need to imagine that this is the company's practice about any other group they choose. Let's say, people with mental health issues, or from impoverished backgrounds, whatever. Not because they would want to discriminate, but just to make sure that the process is being properly observed.

People would be suspicious immediately that this would result in some kind of individual level discrimination. Or the kind of inadvertent pressure it would create for those hiring to avoid triggering that kind of review, which would tend to result in discriminatory choices.

The issue is that diversity can only apply to a group. It can’t be an individual attribute.

You can’t be a ‘diverse’ person. The aims should be for a diverse mix of individuals within a group, reflecting population level norms.

Well, take a look at the average board of directors and you'll see what is not diverse. Straight white men who went to a handful of schools and universities, capable and dedicated I'm sure but they'll have similar experiences and ways of thinking.

Diverse doesn't mean abnormal. It means a mix of viewpoints. It's proven to deliver better results.

It is hard to define though, eg does class background count, mental health conditions, what counts as a disability, does race count and at what point (eg two individuals with the same mixed heritage might have different relationships to their identity). Lots of people from ethnic minority backgrounds still have hugely privileged upbringings (rishi sunak springs to mind). And so on and so on.

But the initiative to want more than lip service to diversity is a good thing.

Of course, the more challenging side of diversity is ensuring a good pipeline of talent, which means better recruitment, company culture, family friendliness etc etc

Sounds ok to me.

This stuff is bad. People seem to be unable to grasp that there is no such thing as a "diverse" person. Or that choosing not to hire someone on the basis of race or sex isn't ok just because that person is not "diverse".

In many cases problems hiring people from different backgrounds start much further down the pipeline. Or are built into the nature of some positions. So you have to look at whether those positions really need to be like that or can be changed, and someone needs to see why the pipeline is delivering mainly a certain type of person.

Company historically has been a real old boys clubs with hires made in the pub or on the golf course. She is bringing about well needed change within financial services to shine a light on bad hiring and HR practices.

Who counts as a 'diverse' hire though? Pip Bunce? Danielle Muscato? Melissa Poulton? Some might say that those individuals are members of an underrepresented minority, other that they are straight white males...

It's not the people that get vetted. It's the process

it’s not really clear what the CEO is doing. The article states:

“The boss of Aviva has revealed senior white male recruits have to get a final sign-off”

Which sounds very much like she’s vetting whether the “non-diverse hire” gets the job or not.

My ex worked for them a few years ago and you definitely could get a job from a mate calling up. Or by shagging the manager. The whole place was like that. But that's probably why she was brought in and trying to make changes.

Which is to say, it’s really depressing because any ‘I need to approve any non-diverse hires’ policy is going to be utterly counterproductive.

Handing straight, white men anything that looks like an ‘oh look; I’m the victim of these dreadful diversity initiatives’ card is a bad idea.

I think that actually qualifies as sex discrimination under the EA. It would be better to just have her approve all hires of sufficient seniority.

Exactly, what on earth is she talking about.

Odd. My CEO and CPO are women and would automatically see and agree senior hires.. would have thought same at L&G rather than saying it's a policy.

As a woman who works in a predominantly male environment, I personally hate initiatives like these. They're divisive, cast suspicion on women who get promoted, and tend to result in people being parachuted in to meet targets, rather than internal promotion which creates bad feeling.

If the article is just about ensuring due process is followed, then the irresponsible headline is basically putting a target on the back of any non white male hired to a senior position. Slow handclap for them.

It's not the people that get vetted. It's the process.

Fair point re: pay gap though.

This is window dressing. The focus should be on ensuring diversity and lack of bias throughout the entire process.

I’d be interested to know how many people that reach the CEO’s door for vetting do not proceed?

Aviva have a significant “gender pay gap” made all the more extraordinary given their CEO, which always provides significant weighting in these exercises, is a woman.

I think this is ok as long as the process for all senior hires is scrutinised, not just non-diverse ones. It shouldn’t be assumed that someone with brown skin or female was hired, therefore everything is fine. As a side note, an individual cannot be diverse or non-diverse!

I’d like to see that the type of diversity she’s talking about includes social class, which is more important and more neglected than sex, race and even disability.

Senior hires in big corporates are not normally recruited for by just putting an open advert out and hoping the right person sees it. Headhunters and recruiters are often used, who will make personal approaches to individuals.

Totally agree. Senior hires should be subject to scrutiny and follow proper process. And the process should be one that aims to reduce/eliminate discrimination and bias. Why would anyone object to that?

I work in financial services,
Teams can be diverse, manager is always a white guy ...

Thanks to her for trying to change things for everyone rather than just looking after herself!

As someone who works in insurance I think this is a good thing because everyone who is in the leadership team is a man of about 50-60ish!

Im a female in a very male dominated environment and I find it difficult to think what my career path is when there aren’t any women in those higher up positions :(

Sounds like a good incentive to tick the bisexual box on your application :)

Yes, sorry, mixed up the headings but the article is definitely not about the hiring screening idea.