7 ms·

White men to women and minorities in tech: We just DGAF

10 points by richmarr 10y ago

dbg31415 10y ago
Is there some benefit to giving a fuck? I think we're at the point where we respect people enough to just say, "Yup, I don't care what sort of junk my boss has, or what color it is, or what other kinds of junk s/he likes to bump it with." The intent of the article is to say we should have some sort of mandated demographics among leadership or in the board room? Because trying to pick a c-team to match up with census data seems like it would mean not picking a c-team based on merit. The color and kind and intent of junk should probably just not be something that we give a fuck about.
- douche 10y ago
  > Is there some benefit to giving a fuck? I haven't seen one yet, save maybe doing so publicly in order to properly virtue-signal and keep the torches-and-pitchfork brigade off your back. It gets very wearisome being berated all the time about diversity , when you just want to go build things. The compiler doesn't care if you're black, white, brown, or purple, and, honestly, I'm very suspicious of anyone who is more interested in the color of ones skin or, as you put it, the configuration of their junk, over getting the job done, done right, and done quickly.
- richmarr 10y ago
  > Is there some benefit to giving a fuck? Yes. Studies show diverse teams perform better... (and incidentally they also show that people who believe themselves to be unbiased are actually more likely to make biased decisions).
  - dbg31415 10y ago
    Going to call BS on this. "Studies show..." -- without a citation seems like an opinion. Lab experiments using mock juries is all I'm finding. Doesn't quite seem relevant to technology teams. Most teams are distribute these days... so literally, other than Google Hangouts and conference calls, I don't get any daily indicators about my team's composition. I don't think it would matter if we did, but I don't see any studies that pertain to tech about diversity improving productivity.
    - richmarr 10y ago
      Ellison/Mullin (2014) used 8 years of data from professional services firms in 60 locations. Is that close enough to tech? You assert that distributed teams change the relationship between diversity and productivity, but I assume you're doing that without evidence, right? What's that opinion based on?
_s 10y ago
We're hiring devs, designers, PM's, digital producers etc. working with recruitment companies, advertising in various places - meet ups, job boards etc etc. Recieved hundreds of CV's, run dozens of interviews. I can count on one hand the number of women that sent their CV through, and we interviewed two, hiring one. This isn't a tech thing - this goes back to children growing up in an environment where gender should make no difference to their desire or interest in STEM subjects, which should be encouraged regardless. Now the conundrum: Given two candidates (m/f) of equal footing (talent, skill, comms etc) - would you offer work to the female or male? Given a stronger male candidate over a female candidate - should I offer the job to the female instead just because she's a she?
- Markoff 10y ago
  so essentially you want to be known as company which discriminate white people and men in particular and prefer gender or race over several skills, good luck with such reputation, be sure I will always choose company not known for having these practices when shopping around
  - _s 10y ago
    Of course we don't - and it's rather disingenuous to say we do. We want to promote diversity where we can, and if you walked into our office today you'd be surprised at the balance we've got. My statement was highlighting what the current state of tech is, and to make a more gender diverse working space i would have to sacrifice quality / skills / talent, which I will not do. But if I am not willing to sacrifice, how am I supposed to have a more diverse space?
    - Markoff 10y ago
      why should you have more diverse space if there are no suitable diverse candidates? that's like expecting that photo models should be ugly women as well or sellers should be rude people to have diversity just for the sake of diversity
      - 10y ago
lebanon_tn 10y ago
From the cited survey: "Less than 5% of investors surveyed by LinkedIn rated diversity as their 'top concern' as compared to macroeconomic conditions, raising capital, hitting revenue targets, or hiring the right people. More than half of investors ranked founder commitment to a diverse team as the least of their concerns when considering to invest." I'd be surprised if even an investment firm made entirely of "women and minorities in tech" had drastically different priorities than this 5%. Diversity for diversity's sake is not a real solution.
- richmarr 10y ago
  > Diversity for diversity's sake is not a real solution. As I've commented above but will summarise here, there are two main points to make in reply to this position (i) You're assuming the status quo is based on merit, which studies unambiguously show isn't the case (ii) Studies also show that diverse teams perform better. So this is also about competitive advantage.
  - gspetr 10y ago
    Studies also show that women are paid less than men for similar work. Where are all the tech companies created by women, with mostly women as employees capitalizing on the market inefficiency giving them competitive advantage?
    - richmarr 10y ago
      > Studies also show that women are paid less than men for similar work. Yes they do, but don't get hung up on women. Studies also show a beneficial effect from racial diversity. As for your other question, is your point that studies are sometimes wrong, or that women are worth less than men, or that there's a gap in the market?
      - gspetr 10y ago
        My point is the latter.

10 points by richmarr 10y ago

Is there some benefit to giving a fuck? I think we're at the point where we respect people enough to just say, "Yup, I don't care what sort of junk my boss has, or what color it is, or what other kinds of junk s/he likes to bump it with." The intent of the article is to say we should have some sort of mandated demographics among leadership or in the board room? Because trying to pick a c-team to match up with census data seems like it would mean not picking a c-team based on merit. The color and kind and intent of junk should probably just not be something that we give a fuck about.

douche 10y ago
> Is there some benefit to giving a fuck? I haven't seen one yet, save maybe doing so publicly in order to properly virtue-signal and keep the torches-and-pitchfork brigade off your back. It gets very wearisome being berated all the time about diversity , when you just want to go build things. The compiler doesn't care if you're black, white, brown, or purple, and, honestly, I'm very suspicious of anyone who is more interested in the color of ones skin or, as you put it, the configuration of their junk, over getting the job done, done right, and done quickly.
richmarr 10y ago
> Is there some benefit to giving a fuck? Yes. Studies show diverse teams perform better... (and incidentally they also show that people who believe themselves to be unbiased are actually more likely to make biased decisions).
- dbg31415 10y ago
  Going to call BS on this. "Studies show..." -- without a citation seems like an opinion. Lab experiments using mock juries is all I'm finding. Doesn't quite seem relevant to technology teams. Most teams are distribute these days... so literally, other than Google Hangouts and conference calls, I don't get any daily indicators about my team's composition. I don't think it would matter if we did, but I don't see any studies that pertain to tech about diversity improving productivity.
  - richmarr 10y ago
    Ellison/Mullin (2014) used 8 years of data from professional services firms in 60 locations. Is that close enough to tech? You assert that distributed teams change the relationship between diversity and productivity, but I assume you're doing that without evidence, right? What's that opinion based on?

_s 10y ago

We're hiring devs, designers, PM's, digital producers etc. working with recruitment companies, advertising in various places - meet ups, job boards etc etc. Recieved hundreds of CV's, run dozens of interviews. I can count on one hand the number of women that sent their CV through, and we interviewed two, hiring one. This isn't a tech thing - this goes back to children growing up in an environment where gender should make no difference to their desire or interest in STEM subjects, which should be encouraged regardless. Now the conundrum: Given two candidates (m/f) of equal footing (talent, skill, comms etc) - would you offer work to the female or male? Given a stronger male candidate over a female candidate - should I offer the job to the female instead just because she's a she?

Markoff 10y ago
so essentially you want to be known as company which discriminate white people and men in particular and prefer gender or race over several skills, good luck with such reputation, be sure I will always choose company not known for having these practices when shopping around
- _s 10y ago
  Of course we don't - and it's rather disingenuous to say we do. We want to promote diversity where we can, and if you walked into our office today you'd be surprised at the balance we've got. My statement was highlighting what the current state of tech is, and to make a more gender diverse working space i would have to sacrifice quality / skills / talent, which I will not do. But if I am not willing to sacrifice, how am I supposed to have a more diverse space?
  - Markoff 10y ago
    why should you have more diverse space if there are no suitable diverse candidates? that's like expecting that photo models should be ugly women as well or sellers should be rude people to have diversity just for the sake of diversity
    - 10y ago

lebanon_tn 10y ago

From the cited survey: "Less than 5% of investors surveyed by LinkedIn rated diversity as their 'top concern' as compared to macroeconomic conditions, raising capital, hitting revenue targets, or hiring the right people. More than half of investors ranked founder commitment to a diverse team as the least of their concerns when considering to invest." I'd be surprised if even an investment firm made entirely of "women and minorities in tech" had drastically different priorities than this 5%. Diversity for diversity's sake is not a real solution.

richmarr 10y ago
> Diversity for diversity's sake is not a real solution. As I've commented above but will summarise here, there are two main points to make in reply to this position (i) You're assuming the status quo is based on merit, which studies unambiguously show isn't the case (ii) Studies also show that diverse teams perform better. So this is also about competitive advantage.
- gspetr 10y ago
  Studies also show that women are paid less than men for similar work. Where are all the tech companies created by women, with mostly women as employees capitalizing on the market inefficiency giving them competitive advantage?
  - richmarr 10y ago
    > Studies also show that women are paid less than men for similar work. Yes they do, but don't get hung up on women. Studies also show a beneficial effect from racial diversity. As for your other question, is your point that studies are sometimes wrong, or that women are worth less than men, or that there's a gap in the market?
    - gspetr 10y ago
      My point is the latter.