2 ms·
It's hard to see when the numbers are small and can be ascribed to one-off cases for quite some time if the blindness is willful enough. Let's say that the org
by elgenie 10y ago
It's hard to see when the numbers are small and can be ascribed to one-off cases for quite some time if the blindness is willful enough.
Let's say that the org started with 10 women out of 40, then two left the company for higher offers, one switched teams for a really good opportunity, another was fired for performing poorly, and then the last one is Fowler; meanwhile, a team of 30 men from a bought company was integrated into the org and of the five qualified women who came through the recruiting pipeline only one accepted her offer while 30 men did. Suddenly, there are 6 women out of 100.
- kbenson 10y agoI agree it can be hard to see, but that's why I think it's good to force yourself to look at it more critically. In your example, even if the 6% was reached in a fairly natural way, it still may result in a workplace that's less inviting to women than it used to be just to how much of a minority they've then become. This isn't just a CYA thing either, as diversity (not just in gender) pays dividends. For example, I'll point you towards the accidentally racist videogame[1]. 1: http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2017/01/12/how-we-accidentally-made-a-racist-videogame http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2017/01/12/how-we-accidentally-made-...