A totally different situation occurs when different groups are known to have dissimilar aptitudes or characteristics. For instance, if the height of an individual is considered, it will be noted that the male population is, on average, taller. This is not due to inadequate measurement tools. The scientific approach to such a situation is to start from the  occupational   analysis  (assuming  this  analysis  was  not biased!)  and  select  the  best  fitting  person  independently  of gender  or  minority membership.  Another  approach  that  often prevails against the scientific one is based on ethical, philosophical, societal or political grounds. That approach states that  females,  or persons belonging to certain minorities, must have fair  chances  of being  selected  despite  the possibility  of lower  scores.  Such  policies  can  lead  to  a  specific  quota  for females or minority members. Although such an intention would be praiseworthy, one should realize that this is realized at the expense of optimal selection and classification. An attempt to avoid quotas without having adverse impact would be to focus on competency profiles and incorporate in them the aptitudes for which  females  or  minority  members  are  known  to  perform equally or better (such as physical agility versus strength, sustained attention, etc).