3 ms·
> Focusing your company on hiring people based on their race and gender, rather than their ability, seems like a horrible idea. What exactly do you estimate ha
by foolrush 10y ago
> Focusing your company on hiring people based on their race and gender, rather than their ability, seems like a horrible idea.
What exactly do you estimate has been happening when your current field of diversity is landlocked at some 90% or more?
Fluke?
- falcolas 10y agoThe hiring pipeline for "diverse" applicants is much smaller than the pipeline for non-diverse applicants. Insinuates that the problem needs to be addressed at a wholly different level.
- kevingadd 10y agoSo, presuming the pipeline is smaller, why does that make it a bad idea to more highly weight diverse candidates? Why can't you expand the pipeline AND hire diverse candidates? What's the solution to the small pipeline? If there's a well-understood solution, why isn't it fixed yet? This has been a known problem for a while. Is it too expensive?
- falcolas 10y ago> does that make it a bad idea to more highly weight diverse candidates It doesn't, but you can't weight in favor of candidates which aren't there. If I have 10 positions to fill, 30 qualified white males, and 1 qualified female, is it better to go out and spend more money attracting females, or fill the jobs with the best candidates and move on? > What's the solution to the small pipeline? As with my other response to you, I believe it's cultural. You can't force women who are interested in writing novels or nursing to go into engineering. Find where the cultural issues are, accept that you'll never get to a clean split between the races and genders (for any position), and the symptoms of few diverse candidates will clear itself up.