3 ms·

I'm confused -- anonymity wouldn't affect diversity, unless the organization was discriminating to begin with. What are your arguments against anonymity, exact

• saurik 10y ago
  I don't know if this is the specific problem that the person you are responding to was alluding to, but: a purely anonymous system is going to end up with hiring tons of young white males--surely fewer than a company that actively discriminates against other groups, but noticibly more than a company that is actively looking for diversity--due to young white makes making up a large percentage of the available talent pool at any given level of expertise (due to a combination of factors, including but not limited to all of "available time", "increasing population", "availability bias", and "systemic oppression"). A company might specifically find value in "we don't just want the world's best engineers: we want a diverse set of backgrounds and viewpoints", and a forced anonymous hiring process actually removes the ability to do that, which might actually help continue to entrench the systemic oppression issue (as then everyone builds things for the same market demographic as that's all they understand).
  • toomuchtodo 10y ago
    If it's okay to hire for diversity, is it okay to say "I only want to hire white guys in their 20s and 30s"? If not, why not? Is there proof that "diversity hiring" (back in the day we called this "affirmative action", the lingo changes but the goals remain the same) provides substantial benefits to an organization? If so, fantastic! We should promote it across the industry. I have yet to see any data that this is the case though. "In God We Trust; all others bring data"
  • tabeth 10y ago
    A lot of what you say really requires some evidence. For example: > a purely anonymous system is going to end up with hiring tons of young white males- A system that's non anonymous has already proven itself to hire a ton of young white males... > surely fewer than a company that actively discriminates against other groups, but noticibly more than a company that is actively looking for diversity- Citations needed. > A company might specifically find value in "we don't just want the world's best engineers: we want a diverse set of backgrounds and viewpoints", Discrimination isn't good, period. That means discriminating for or against white males. Also, you imply that the groups I mentioned couldn't succeed on their own merit. Overall, you basically encourage discrimination. Got it.
    • lacampbell 10y ago
      A lot of what you say really requires some evidence. You literally just kicked off a discussion by using four op-ed pieces as sources. You have no grounds to tell people their posts require some evidence. Get some actual facts and figures and then make your point.
      • threatofrain 10y ago
        His point is actually your point, but less emotional. Also, in debate, you have neither the grounds to speak or be silent. Rules to free discussion exist because we want them to.
• eikenberry 10y ago
  How do you anonymously interview for cultural fit?
  • davidgerard 10y ago
    You don't, because "culture fit" sounds nice but in practice means "excuse for otherwise-illegal discrimination".
• tastythrowaway2 10y ago
  Anonymity would not affect diversity, but it would not necessarily enforce it. Indeed until all races, genders, sexual orientation, socioeconomic strata, etc. apply in identical numbers, one must discriminate in order to guarantee diversity. EDIT: Upon further reflection, anonymity could help combat ageism (scrubbing specific graduation and employment dates, for example). but in the general sense I believe the point still stands.