3 ms·

So by your own admission, you're advocating hiring a female CEO based on a probabilistic argument that females tend to make the workplace more female-friendly.

So by your own admission, you're advocating hiring a female CEO based on a probabilistic argument that females tend to make the workplace more female-friendly. Isn't this akin to saying that the US Department of Education should hire an Asian leader because the US is bad at math and science, and Asians have been shown to be generally better at math and science?

HelloMcFly 9y ago
Good grief. No, I do not advocate hiring a female - or anyone - on any single set of criteria. I don't think Uber - or anyone - should only consider or be committed to hiring women. To do so would be both unethical, sub-optimal and illegal. That is as clear as I can be on that subject. However, I do think they should make an increased effort to find qualified female candidates for the CEO position and put them through same selection process as male candidates. And I do think that all things being equal, women candidates will have a leg-up on male candidates in the one particular performance domain of redressing the female-hostile culture Travis and the leadership team created because on balance women will have more understanding of the issues facing the female workforce. However, 1) that isn't the only performance domain, and 2) the selection process may very well reveal that one or more of the male candidates has better insight into the issue, more personal experience creating the kind of culture change needed, or both. That's why the selection process exist. > Isn't this akin to saying that the US Department of Education should hire an Asian leader because the US is bad at math and science, and Asians have been shown to be generally better at math and science? No, it's not, and that doesn't seem to me to be a good-faith analogy on your part at all.