It’s also possible that some promotions/hires are based on desired political appearance of the company. Promoting someone based on certain race and gender types ironically makes your company seem less racist and sexist to the casual outside observer.
In the high-dogma arena there’s incredibly easy and visible signals that give you the ability to appear like “one of the good ones.”
I think coincidentally this is highly attractive to elite circles too. Follow all the social justice rituals and shibboleth and you suddenly get the camouflage of an empathetic, good person.
If a person is indistinguishable from a good human being, isn't it actually a good human being?
Many are, yes. I had to hire one because my director’s bonus was implicitly tied to a diversity quota OKR, and the VP’s bonus was explicitly tied to one, which he blogged about as a shameful virtue signaling PR exercise. They didn’t even interview her. Then we way over-leveled her to boot, because there was another stupid OKR to grow diversity among senior levels. And this was at a big tech company that you’ve definitely heard of.
This is happening at many companies who claim that they aren’t lowering the bar.
Truth be told I had already lowered the bar and wanted to pass her but still couldn’t justify it. I didn’t want to deal with the diversity police and had my fingers crossed that she would be the one.
Some perfectly capable white guy didn’t get an opportunity as a result.
You say "people with those types of built in personal issues float to the top" aren't you implying their positions are not earned based on merit and, therefore, that they are less competent than their peers?