The Double Standard: Why Is AI Welcomed But Not Diverse Humans?

Why do we give flawed AI systems more benefit of the doubt than brilliant humans who aren't like us? The DEI backlash and AI hype make a stark contrast.

Photo by Bernd 📷 Dittrich on Unsplash

Hi everyone,

Thank you for reading Great CTOs Focus on Outcomes. I publish weekly and have an archive of over 150 posts, each packed with valuable insights on various topics relevant to CTOs and the issues they face, distilled from my career experience.

I strive to make each post a helpful resource on the topic it focuses on so that when a CTO has a need, they can reference an atomic nugget of insight. To this end, I regularly revisit and refine posts, ensuring you always receive the best and most up-to-date information with the most clarity.

This is an early draft of a post that I'd love feedback from paying Great CTO subscribers. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion has catalyzed dialogue that is at once heartfelt and contested, reflecting the complexity of the issue. 

The intent of this post has been to contrast the decline in advocacy in the boardroom for altogether human endeavours, that of creating more opportunities for people, and it feels like that fervour has been replaced by advocacy for the advancement of non-human intelligence. Let me know if this contrast helps put AI hype into context or simply adds to the confusion. 

If you'd like the opportunity to see my posts early and provide feedback to help improve them, consider becoming a subscriber. 

In boardrooms globally, a curious phenomenon is unfolding. Companies are racing to integrate AI agents into their most critical processes: hiring, lending, strategic planning, and customer service, despite these systems' well-documented biases, unpredictable failures, and opacity. Yet many of these same organisations express scepticism about diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives (DEI), citing concerns about merit, fairness, and performance.

This isn't simply a case of irony; it’s a fundamental inconsistency in how we think about intelligence, capability, and risk and reflects biases in our expectations of systems versus humans.