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

[ValerieVomit]

The boss of Aviva has revealed senior white male recruits have to get a final sign-off from her and the chief people officer as part of the firm's drive to improve diversity. Amanda Blanc, who became the insurer's first female chief executive in 2020, said the policy formed part of its efforts to end sexism in the financial services industry. The 56-year-old told MPs on the Treasury select committee that 'there is no non-diverse hire at Aviva without it being signed off by me and the chief people officer'.

https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2023/dec/13/aviva-has-acted-to-sack-male-employees-for-inappropriate-behaviour-says-boss-amanda-blanc-sexism-in-the-city-inquiry

What do you think?

Weird article where they don't actually address or even mention the comment in the headline.

I have found a quote (from the DM article on this) where it details what was said:

"Speaking at the Sexism in the City inquiry yesterday, she continued: 'Not because I don't trust my team but because I want to make sure that the process followed for that recruitment has been diverse, has been properly done and is not just a phone call to a mate to say, 'would you like a job, pop up and we'll fix it up for you'.'
Mrs Blanc's comments are understood to only relate to senior hires at the London-based firm which has 22,000 staff, reported the Daily Telegraph."

That all seems utterly reasonable to me.

You can't get a job by phoning a mate at a place like this anyway.

Did you link the right article, OP?

As a PP says, this article doesn't cover the comment in your thread title.

(The article matches its own headline; it's the OP's thread title that's on something different.)

Both topics are worth discussing, of course.

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

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

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 :(

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!

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

Fair point re: pay gap though.

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.

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.

Exactly, what on earth is she talking about.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

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.

Sounds ok to me.