I don't see the correlation between diversity programs and retaining the best talent. Not because diversity isn't important, or because it's a negative thing, but because in general diversity programs function by more closely examining/attracting a subset of a larger total population of workers. You could still of course find the best talent within those subsets, but the implication is still that you could just as easily miss the top talent that isn't in those subsets.
Why is it binary? I'm pretty sure you can focus on both. Also, it's not hard to get candidates that are non-diverse, almost by definition the status quo favors their hiring, hence the diversity programs.
I didn't mean to imply that both can't be done at the same time. I thought you meant that diversity programs were an inherent part of finding the best talent when you wrote
> "It's Google's perogative/obligation to find and retain the best talent. I suspect that's what the purpose of their diversity programs are for."
To me this meant that to find the best talent it's more effective to focus on subsets of the total talent pool, which didn't make sense to me.
