content: This is a good question that never gets asked as often as it should. The narrative is that a wider range of experiences among your employees leads to more well-rounded products which are better able to serve a larger proportion of society. This holds the implicit assumptions (with commentary):   Your minority employees have an equal say in the user-facing design of your products (as opposed to reality where usually a small number of product designers design the product and everyone else works to spec)   Suitably skilled candidates from a wide range of backgrounds will apply for roles you advertise (this usually will not be the case)   It's possible to design your product to appeal to a wide range of minority demographics without compromising appeal for your majority user base (appealing to a wide range of different minority demographics will require a large number of different and possibly conflicting changes to your product)   There's a positive return on investment from targeting said minority demographics (by definition they're a small market when taken as a group, and the further you specialise for smaller, more specific demographics the worse your ROI will get.)   It seems obvious that, if deliberately hiring a diversified workforce in order to better target minority demographics was the optimal approach to making money, companies would be doing this already and we wouldn't need any kind of quota system or artificial incentives.