Yesterday, I blogged about the premise of determining supplier diversity status on employment base rather than ownership base. I also linked to a 2008 post of mine describing how UPS implemented LGTB-owned businesses as a new category of diverse suppliers.<\/p>\n
Don\u2019t miss updates on Procurement & Supply Chain, Subscribe here!<\/p>\n
One thing that I wanted to bring up separately is that UPS has another uncommon supplier diversity classification for \u201cDisabled Business Enterprise.\u201d From their website, UPS explains that a Disabled Business Enterprise is a company that is \u201c51 percent owned, controlled and operated by a handicapped individual or service-disabled individual. A handicapped individual is a person who has a physical, mental or emotional impairment, defect, ailment, disease or disability of a permanent nature, which in any way limits the selection of any type employment for which the person would otherwise be qualified or qualifiable. \u201d<\/p>\n
This is interesting. I believe that supporting the disabled is a noble social responsibility goal, certainly at least as noble as supporting ethnic groups that had been discriminated against in the past.<\/p>\n
To me, it makes sense. So much sense that I think it should be adopted as part of any supplier diversity program.<\/p>\n
Again, I feel that it can have broader social impact if it takes into account not just the ownership, but the employment base as well. Could we see more of this?<\/p>\n
I think so. And it wouldn\u2019t surprise me if we saw subset categories, such as a category for Autism Spectrum Disorders which are becoming more and more of a concern for society.<\/p>\n
According to the US Center for Disease Control, Autism Spectrum Disorders are \u201ca group of developmental disabilities that can cause significant social, communication and behavioral challenges.\u201d And, according to Reuters (and countless other sources), autism is on the rise, with incidences \u201cbefore the 1980\u2019s\u2026affecting one in every 2,000 children\u201d growing to the latest ratio of 1 in 110 children. The rapid growth of autism is definitely a big-time social concern, making doing business with suppliers who hire those with autism certainly a socially responsible overture.<\/p>\n
An interesting excerpt from UPS\u2019 definition of Disabled Business Enterprise that ties in with autism is this one: \u201cin any way limits the selection of any type employment for which the person would otherwise be qualified or qualifiable.\u201d Some individuals with disorders on the autism spectrum are highly intelligent and capable, but their disorder is evident in social interaction. While someone with autism may be a phenomenal accountant, software developer, engineer, etc. \u2013 in other words being \u201cqualified or qualifiable\u201d \u2013 they may struggle in the interview process and may find getting employment difficult as a result. I think that companies who are aware of autism, and set aside any discrimination towards those with it, should be commended.<\/p>\n
Could employment of the disabled be the next frontier in supplier diversity? Aside from autism, what other specific disabilities might be considered for qualifying the diverse supplier of tomorrow?<\/p>\n
Disclosure: One of my children has been diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Yesterday, I blogged about the premise of determining supplier diversity […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":4083,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3008","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-procurement"],"yoast_head":"\n