Adding to the problem
What happens when "inclusive" hiring practices are implemented in the real world is you get candidates scheduled for 3-hour to 6-hour (if not longer) face-to-face interviews -- after already facing a battery of phone interviews with stakeholders (and I use that term loosely) at all levels -- with several different people. And then again for a second such interview. Maybe a third. Maybe more.
And the more hurdles you make your candidates jump over to please you -- and, in this case, EVERYONE IN YOUR DEPARTMENT OR COMPANY -- the more you make yourself a less attractive place to work. Job hunting is a full-time, er, job. Consequently, any new barrier you infuse into the hiring process translates to drop-offs in the number of qualified, talented candidates you'll get. (If "eliminating resumes" -- regardless of the aptitude of the candidate -- is a recruiting department's goal, then that recruiting department is lazy at best, inept at worst.) If I'm a job seeker, my time is better spent completely avoiding companies like these and instead interviewing with companies that know how to make a consarned decision and don't mind risking "failing fast." I'll also be happier working at such a company.
Plus: if you have a diversity problem at your company, I cannot imagine asking everyone to agree on one person is going to help.
Respectfully, fie on this.