We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
If the person is ready to be a manager, it works out well.
But if the person is promoted not on their skill, but on their DNA, then it usually does not work out well. The reason - I believe - is because the promotion does not give the employee time to learn how to be a good manager. Any bad habits or ineffective management techniques the person has do not get tossed aside - they get reinforced.
Consider an example: A female manager is aggressive (good) and a bully (bad). If she is not promoted early, she will learn that being a bully is ineffective as no boss would promote someone who isn't a good manager. But if she is promoted early, she will believe that being an aggressive bully is effective, so she will continue behaving that way. She will not, however, consider that she got promoted because of her gender. In fact, most women that I know would be furious if one were to suggest that they were promoted due to their DNA - be it good looks, gender, height, etc.. Like any other person, a woman manager wants to be promoted because she is a good manager - not because she is a woman.
From the company's perspective, I believe that DNA-promoting hurts the company. It may help in certain external statistics, but a company needs good leaders with effective skills. A well-trained manager is good at their job, regardless of DNA. But one who is pushed through based upon DNA hurts the company by being less well-trained than the ones who weren't.
At the risk of offending anyone, I'm going to share an exchange between one of my clients (I do computer support in Detroit for small offices) and myself. He is a white dentist in a mostly black neighborhood. He was looking for a partner for his business. I suggested someone black. I felt it would help his patients feel more comfortable - more than half are black. He shot that down very quickly. He replied that his students know that affirmative action is what allowed many of the black dentists to get into dental school and what allowed them to pass even though they aren't as qualified as a non-black dentist. Many of his black patients had tried black dentists before and quickly learned they they aren't as good as most white dentists.
Dentistry is a science where the results can be imperically judged. Do your teeth hurt, work, and look good? Management style isn't so straightforward to determine if a woman is a good manager or not. So the effects of a policy of promoting people based upon their DNA isn't very easy to determine.
(Apologies for the slightly off topic and lengthy post.)