Chairperson of the board
Nasdaq, America's second largest stock exchange, has announced its intent to set diversity quotas for listed companies. Companies will have to have at least two directors selected from an approved diversity shortlist.
Firms on the Nasdaq, which include tech giants such as Apple and Tesla, will have to have at least two diverse directors, or explain why they do not. The directors should include one person who identifies as female and another as an underrepresented minority or LGBTQ+.
It seems that a male-to-female T alphabet souper doesn't count as a double-whammy, and couldn't thereby fulfil both criteria at once. Which begs the question, what's the difference between someone who identifies as female and a transgender woman? Why not stipulate a real, biologically-relevant woman as one of the requirements? Hey ho.
Companies will also have to declare their boards' diversity statistics. This makes sense, as it will allow investors to make decisions based on their own ethical criteria—just as they can already with tobacco and armaments manufacture, and environmental performance. But stipulating that companies comply with an arbitrary quota system in the first place seems like the tail wagging the dog. Companies should select the best talent for the job, not ticking an arbitrary set of boxes.
I'm under no illusion that, in the real world, not all directors are in their positions for what they know, more than who they know. Or what they know about who they know. But that's up to the companies involved. Quota games and box-ticking should stay with the Hollywoke nonentities at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.