10 ms·

You're overcomplicating things. In the ideal if we erased biases in education and staffing, we'd expect the various distributions we measure across tech compani

You're overcomplicating things. In the ideal if we erased biases in education and staffing, we'd expect the various distributions we measure across tech companies to match a random sampling of the population at large. When we see large deviations from the population at large, it's a clear signal that something is going on. This isn't that obscure, and we certainly don't need to engage in a false, hand wringing, semantic debate derailment along the lines of "but what IS diversity REALLY anyway?" Please. You know exactly what we're talking about here. Your post is an exercise in identity politics as well. Welcome to same bowl the rest of us are in.

spaceflunky 10y ago
My query is more along the lines of how to invest resources to correct large deviations from the population at large and which deviations are more important than others. For example, HMC is attempting to address diversity, but only along gender lines. There is no attempt to address racial diversity in any means. Further in very progressive companies like Google and Facebook, Hispanic and Blacks in leadership positions are less than 1%, compared to a US population of 17% and 12% nationwide (respectively). In these companies, 24% of leadership roles are held by women. That means that with regards to women, they are hitting 48% of their target (if the target is to get a 50/50 gender split). Whereas, with regards to race, they are hitting 5% of their target with Hispanics and 8% with blacks (if the goal is to get close to the population sample at large). So why is that that most "diversity" program only focus on gender? I know that the two aren't mutual exclusive, but it's no secret that far more resources are spent on gender diversity than anything else.
- jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
  > For example, HMC is attempting to address diversity, but only along gender lines. There is no attempt to address racial diversity in any means. This particular article is about gender imbalance, but I'm sure HMC has policies and controls that address race as well. I'd be curious about the numbers. I visited there 2 decades ago and it was definitely a very white student population.
drspacemonkey 10y ago
>In the ideal if we erased biases in education and staffing, we'd expect the various distributions we measure across tech companies to match a random sampling of the population at large Has anyone actually proven that, or is that just an assumption?

spaceflunky 10y ago

My query is more along the lines of how to invest resources to correct large deviations from the population at large and which deviations are more important than others. For example, HMC is attempting to address diversity, but only along gender lines. There is no attempt to address racial diversity in any means. Further in very progressive companies like Google and Facebook, Hispanic and Blacks in leadership positions are less than 1%, compared to a US population of 17% and 12% nationwide (respectively). In these companies, 24% of leadership roles are held by women. That means that with regards to women, they are hitting 48% of their target (if the target is to get a 50/50 gender split). Whereas, with regards to race, they are hitting 5% of their target with Hispanics and 8% with blacks (if the goal is to get close to the population sample at large). So why is that that most "diversity" program only focus on gender? I know that the two aren't mutual exclusive, but it's no secret that far more resources are spent on gender diversity than anything else.

jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
> For example, HMC is attempting to address diversity, but only along gender lines. There is no attempt to address racial diversity in any means. This particular article is about gender imbalance, but I'm sure HMC has policies and controls that address race as well. I'd be curious about the numbers. I visited there 2 decades ago and it was definitely a very white student population.

drspacemonkey 10y ago

>In the ideal if we erased biases in education and staffing, we'd expect the various distributions we measure across tech companies to match a random sampling of the population at large Has anyone actually proven that, or is that just an assumption?