The interview process was in three phases.
The initial phase was done over the phone and conducted by the Diversity and Inclusion Assistant. The questions were straightforward regarding background, education, and skills applicable to the position.
The second round was a panel. There were multiple Diversity and Inclusion Assistants and again, there were no real curve balls from a question standpoint. All of them were pleasant and allowed ample time to answer questions. The questions were largely reminiscent of the first interview.
The third interview was virtual and with the Chief Diversity Officer. She was cordial enough and asked many questions regarding getting the office to an acceptable level as they were relatively new and trying to get to a point where they could justify the salaries of staff and positively influence the alumni base as there was much historical strife.
You may draw your own inferences from the composition of the office, but ALL SIX members of the office are female and identifying as such. Four are African-American (including the eventual person hired for the position) and two are from Central Asia.
Again, draw your own conclusions about the Chief Diversity Officer's idea of what a "diverse" office looks like, but if you are a qualified male or a female who is not a minority, then you should probably curb your enthusiasm regarding joining the team. The composition of the office makes it easy to see why alumni relations are strained and the university administration should recognize that the Office of Diversity and Inclusion manifests very little of both.
