5 ms·

At what point is a workforce sufficiently diverse? Is it just a matter of “too many white males in this room - remove some of them, replace with politically acc

by jtms 8y ago

At what point is a workforce sufficiently diverse? Is it just a matter of “too many white males in this room - remove some of them, replace with politically acceptable demographics”? Feels like even in a diverse workplace there are always going to be people not happy about “not enough people like me here”. Do we set quotas and start passing over qualified candidates to hit them? I’m all for fixing real problems, but the target on this one seems exceptional fast moving and mired in destructive unintended consequences.

perfmode 8y ago
You're missing the point. There are structural problems that inhibit participation from underrepresented groups. The objective is to level the playing field so everyone has a fair chance at success. disclaimer: i am a black engineer who is tired of wasting time arguing with people who harbor views such as yours.
- ng12 8y ago
  And what does that have to do with Facebook? If there are very few PoC software engineers, how is it your fault for not hiring enough of them? The article mentions the technical staff is 22% female which seems remarkable.
- crowdpleaser 8y ago
  Alright, but the structural problems are upstream of recruiting and promotions. It's simply bad engineering to try to solve the problem downstream rather than at the root.
  - idrios 8y ago
    In this case, solving the problem downstream does tackle the problem at the root. A lot of people in engineering went down that path because they were inspired by someone when they were younger. If there were more women and minorities in engineering, then other (young) women and minorities would be able to see them as role models and follow suit.
    - ng12 8y ago
      > A lot of people in engineering went down that path because they were inspired by someone when they were younger. Who? I started programming because computers are fun. If you really care about getting more women and minorities involved in tech volunteer at a local high school -- there are dozens of programs which seek to get young people exposed to programming. Anything else is just blowing smoke.
      - idrios 8y ago
        Well if we're using personal anecdotes, I had never touched a line of code until college and had just assumed I wasn't smart enough for it. I did study engineering though, which was an easy choice because I had tons of family who were engineers. Freshman year I took Java as a core requirement and discovered I was pretty good at it, so I stuck with it. It shouldn't be a stretch of the mind that programming would be more accessible to someone who was raised knowing programmers, than to someone who was raised without. > If you really care about getting more women and minorities involved in tech volunteer at a local high school This is great advice. That doesn't discredit the impact that having diversity in tech has.
    - crowdpleaser 8y ago
      >A lot of people in engineering went down that path because they were inspired by someone when they were younger. If there were more women and minorities in engineering, then other (young) women and minorities would be able to see them as role models and follow suit. This is really interesting claim and perhaps somewhat biased. Some preliminary testing of VR teachers suggests that young women prefer to be taught by women, and boys have a preference for robots/drones. My own personal experience is that mecha anime got me inspired to work in STEM, I can see why that might not have universal appeal, but the claim that people need role models who look like them isn't universal. source: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190108095108.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190108095108.h...
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - minikites 8y ago
    How do we solve it at the root without having aspirational figures for young people to look up to? Representation is important for creating role models, otherwise young minorities get the message that a particular field isn't accessible to them.
    - oh_sigh 8y ago
      Is there any evidence that kids need aspirational figures that match their specific gender/racial identity? If so, what(if any) other factors are in play? Sexual orientation? Hair/eye color? Height?
      - perfmode 8y ago
        Yes. I didn’t know programming was a career I could pursue. I did know I could become a basketball player, though. I know that my existence continues to influence my younger siblings, and the children of family-friends. I’m known as “the one who worked at google”. Without me as an example, tech wouldn’t be in the perceptual sphere of attainability within much of my family and community.
        googlryas 8y ago
        How did you become a programmer, and not a basketball player? Obviously people in the lives of children impact them. Does seeing, possibly, a black engineer on TV count as being in the life of a child?
        perfmode 8y ago
        I grew up in poverty, dropped out of high school in the 10th grade, and gave up on life. Then, floundered until I turned 21. Decided to try to turn my life around.Was encouraged by a significant other to try school again. Got a GED. Enrolled in a state school. Discovered I am actually not bad at college math. Realized that computer science is at the intersection of computers and math, and that I might be able to succeed at it. Aced every class and applied to the top 10 schools in the country. Was accepted and transferred to Stanford. Then, took advantage of every opportunity to get involved in the software engineering profession. It was an uphill battle the entire way. Should we be looking to my life-path as a scalable way out of poverty? > Obviously people in the lives of children impact them. Does seeing, possibly, a black engineer on TV count as being in the life of a child? Yes, definitely. TV is realer than real-life for most people. It's the average person's lens into the world, for better or worse.
  - HillaryBriss 8y ago
    wait. why is it "bad engineering" to try to solve the problem downstream? the company itself knows as well as or better than anyone upstream what its own jobs require. the company itself is in a good position to train/educate a person (of any particular group) to do that job. upstream educational institutions can promote diversity and graduate people all day long -- but you still need a company to actually hire those people.
- bigfartchili 8y ago
  So you end up with unqualified people in positions just to meet the quota. All of a sudden sterotypes about these people start and anyone from this group starts getting labeled as dumb because they are hiring candidates by appearance rather than qualification. Sounds like a real good idea.
  - whichdan 8y ago
    Stop assuming that people from underrepresented groups are inherently unqualified.
    - oh_sigh 8y ago
      That doesn't seem like the assumption OP was making. OP was making an assumption that people are racist though.
    - asdkhadsj 8y ago
      > Stop assuming that people from underrepresented groups are inherently unqualified. They're not. They are commenting how the criteria for hiring changed to include other attributes not related to skill. If I hire people based on a mix of skill and how much they like baseball, I am inherently hiring on a different measuring stick. I could end up hiring someone with the most skill out of the hiring pool, but that doesn't matter - I'm not hiring based on skill, I'm hiring on some combination of skill and baseball. It does not mean that the person who gets hired isn't the most skilled. But it also does not mean that the person who gets hired is the most skilled. I stopped caring about hiring the most skilled the moment I added a largely arbitrary hiring attribute into the requirements, how much they like baseball. Generally I have a problem with this, but I think it's less of a problem than people make it out to be. Yes, we are not hiring based on skill alone.. but, we never were. We were hiring based on skill, attitude, work ethic, how they work with people, etc. A long laundry list of things we want a candidate to be, and difficult to figure out to boot. So yea, if we stop hiring whites because we've got too many, we may miss out on some skill - but when so many of the hiring requirements are vague, difficult to judge and largely a meta-game itself, we stopped caring about hiring skill long ago. Hell, even skill is difficult to judge. Plus, eventually it'll even out. Suddenly we'll have to stop hiring minorities because there's too many in X company. Which is ironic heh. In the same way that males in some colleges are becoming a minority. Irony.
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  Should some minority groups be over represented, because they are so minor, that even in a medium sized company with proportional representation, they may be the only member of their minority there?
- antisthenes 8y ago
  The way to fix structural problems is look at the funnels way before these people get to the company. It's at the preschool, primary school and university level. Why are we somehow pretending 100% of responsibility rests on the employer?
- Jare 8y ago
  The objective is also to ensure that the structural problems do not prevent you from finding, attracting and/or promoting great candidates from underrepresented groups. The default process does not let them shine, and does not appreciate the value in the diversity that they bring to a team. If I'm going to set up a medical team, I don't want the best and most lauded 4 surgeons in the world, I want only 1 of those so I can also have the best anesthesist (sp?), the best physio, the best psychologist... you get the idea. (Edit not you in particular, of course... I mean everyone) "Culture fit" has become an accepted "soft" value for which a technically superior candidate may be passed over; why this resistance to diversity as a soft value too? New points of view, new mental patterns, new sources of inspiration... that is better than the same pov repeated 4 times. Why does it need to be explained over and over? (we know why, whether we like it or not) It doesn't mean diversity takes precedence over other soft or hard skills and valuable aspects of a candidate, it just means it takes is place among them.
- benmw333 8y ago
  From the very beginning you're adverse to speaking to those that do not agree with your viewpoints? Unpopular opinion: I don't care about diversity. I care about being an individual and finding my own ways around obstacles in life, a strong family unit, consistent values - practiced daily. As for Sophia - it's not society's job to ensure your comfort. Sophia is a biological white male, no? I guess that makes your crusade easier when you despise what you once were.
  - perfmode 8y ago
    You're fortunate to be in a position where there are no structural obstacles impeding your progress. Show some consideration for those who aren't.
    - anon12345690 8y ago
      how do you know anything about that person?
  - matthewmacleod 8y ago
    Without meaning to be too cruel, you don’t sound like a very nice person. You should care about diversity, because it’s an inherent good. If you have no diversity, you are missing part of the picture. Your family values, for instance, might be different from others. And let’s be clear, describing transgender people as “despising what they once were” is not a very acceptable view.
    - anon12345690 8y ago
      people only think of diversity in skin color which is the problem
- anon12345690 8y ago
  nothing structural stopped you and the evidence is that you got the job you want why does it matter so much that other people look just like you? why cant you look past other peoples skin color?
Dirlewanger 8y ago
People need to realize that men and women are biologically different, are interested in different things, and that there's nothing wrong with that. It's happening, but slowly. The Atlantic had an article not too long ago covering a study showing this (unfortunately they didn't draw any bigconclusions). Norway, one of the most gender-diverse countries in the world, (most likely) pulled funding from their Norwegian Gender Institute when a TV documentary about the differences between the sexes aired. This friction between sexes is ruining the workplace all because certain groups have political axes to grind. Men dominating e.g. construction/technical fields and women dominating nursing/education fields isn't some grand cultural conspiracy to keep the sexes on certain tracks for life; that's just what we each are good at.
- fzeroracer 8y ago
  Can you explain what biological changes women went through in the 1980s that would suddenly cause a large dropoff of women studying in computer science [1]? [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when...
anon12345690 8y ago
never because diversity just means skin color which is racist but nobody will admit it

by jtms 8y ago

perfmode 8y ago

You're missing the point. There are structural problems that inhibit participation from underrepresented groups. The objective is to level the playing field so everyone has a fair chance at success. disclaimer: i am a black engineer who is tired of wasting time arguing with people who harbor views such as yours.

ng12 8y ago
And what does that have to do with Facebook? If there are very few PoC software engineers, how is it your fault for not hiring enough of them? The article mentions the technical staff is 22% female which seems remarkable.
crowdpleaser 8y ago
Alright, but the structural problems are upstream of recruiting and promotions. It's simply bad engineering to try to solve the problem downstream rather than at the root.
- idrios 8y ago
  In this case, solving the problem downstream does tackle the problem at the root. A lot of people in engineering went down that path because they were inspired by someone when they were younger. If there were more women and minorities in engineering, then other (young) women and minorities would be able to see them as role models and follow suit.
  - ng12 8y ago
    > A lot of people in engineering went down that path because they were inspired by someone when they were younger. Who? I started programming because computers are fun. If you really care about getting more women and minorities involved in tech volunteer at a local high school -- there are dozens of programs which seek to get young people exposed to programming. Anything else is just blowing smoke.
    - idrios 8y ago
      Well if we're using personal anecdotes, I had never touched a line of code until college and had just assumed I wasn't smart enough for it. I did study engineering though, which was an easy choice because I had tons of family who were engineers. Freshman year I took Java as a core requirement and discovered I was pretty good at it, so I stuck with it. It shouldn't be a stretch of the mind that programming would be more accessible to someone who was raised knowing programmers, than to someone who was raised without. > If you really care about getting more women and minorities involved in tech volunteer at a local high school This is great advice. That doesn't discredit the impact that having diversity in tech has.
  - crowdpleaser 8y ago
    >A lot of people in engineering went down that path because they were inspired by someone when they were younger. If there were more women and minorities in engineering, then other (young) women and minorities would be able to see them as role models and follow suit. This is really interesting claim and perhaps somewhat biased. Some preliminary testing of VR teachers suggests that young women prefer to be taught by women, and boys have a preference for robots/drones. My own personal experience is that mecha anime got me inspired to work in STEM, I can see why that might not have universal appeal, but the claim that people need role models who look like them isn't universal. source: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190108095108.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190108095108.h...
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- minikites 8y ago
  How do we solve it at the root without having aspirational figures for young people to look up to? Representation is important for creating role models, otherwise young minorities get the message that a particular field isn't accessible to them.
  - oh_sigh 8y ago
    Is there any evidence that kids need aspirational figures that match their specific gender/racial identity? If so, what(if any) other factors are in play? Sexual orientation? Hair/eye color? Height?
    - perfmode 8y ago
      Yes. I didn’t know programming was a career I could pursue. I did know I could become a basketball player, though. I know that my existence continues to influence my younger siblings, and the children of family-friends. I’m known as “the one who worked at google”. Without me as an example, tech wouldn’t be in the perceptual sphere of attainability within much of my family and community.
      - googlryas 8y ago
        How did you become a programmer, and not a basketball player? Obviously people in the lives of children impact them. Does seeing, possibly, a black engineer on TV count as being in the life of a child?
        perfmode 8y ago
        I grew up in poverty, dropped out of high school in the 10th grade, and gave up on life. Then, floundered until I turned 21. Decided to try to turn my life around.Was encouraged by a significant other to try school again. Got a GED. Enrolled in a state school. Discovered I am actually not bad at college math. Realized that computer science is at the intersection of computers and math, and that I might be able to succeed at it. Aced every class and applied to the top 10 schools in the country. Was accepted and transferred to Stanford. Then, took advantage of every opportunity to get involved in the software engineering profession. It was an uphill battle the entire way. Should we be looking to my life-path as a scalable way out of poverty? > Obviously people in the lives of children impact them. Does seeing, possibly, a black engineer on TV count as being in the life of a child? Yes, definitely. TV is realer than real-life for most people. It's the average person's lens into the world, for better or worse.
- HillaryBriss 8y ago
  wait. why is it "bad engineering" to try to solve the problem downstream? the company itself knows as well as or better than anyone upstream what its own jobs require. the company itself is in a good position to train/educate a person (of any particular group) to do that job. upstream educational institutions can promote diversity and graduate people all day long -- but you still need a company to actually hire those people.
bigfartchili 8y ago
So you end up with unqualified people in positions just to meet the quota. All of a sudden sterotypes about these people start and anyone from this group starts getting labeled as dumb because they are hiring candidates by appearance rather than qualification. Sounds like a real good idea.
- whichdan 8y ago
  Stop assuming that people from underrepresented groups are inherently unqualified.
  - oh_sigh 8y ago
    That doesn't seem like the assumption OP was making. OP was making an assumption that people are racist though.
  - asdkhadsj 8y ago
    > Stop assuming that people from underrepresented groups are inherently unqualified. They're not. They are commenting how the criteria for hiring changed to include other attributes not related to skill. If I hire people based on a mix of skill and how much they like baseball, I am inherently hiring on a different measuring stick. I could end up hiring someone with the most skill out of the hiring pool, but that doesn't matter - I'm not hiring based on skill, I'm hiring on some combination of skill and baseball. It does not mean that the person who gets hired isn't the most skilled. But it also does not mean that the person who gets hired is the most skilled. I stopped caring about hiring the most skilled the moment I added a largely arbitrary hiring attribute into the requirements, how much they like baseball. Generally I have a problem with this, but I think it's less of a problem than people make it out to be. Yes, we are not hiring based on skill alone.. but, we never were. We were hiring based on skill, attitude, work ethic, how they work with people, etc. A long laundry list of things we want a candidate to be, and difficult to figure out to boot. So yea, if we stop hiring whites because we've got too many, we may miss out on some skill - but when so many of the hiring requirements are vague, difficult to judge and largely a meta-game itself, we stopped caring about hiring skill long ago. Hell, even skill is difficult to judge. Plus, eventually it'll even out. Suddenly we'll have to stop hiring minorities because there's too many in X company. Which is ironic heh. In the same way that males in some colleges are becoming a minority. Irony.
oh_sigh 8y ago
Should some minority groups be over represented, because they are so minor, that even in a medium sized company with proportional representation, they may be the only member of their minority there?
antisthenes 8y ago
The way to fix structural problems is look at the funnels way before these people get to the company. It's at the preschool, primary school and university level. Why are we somehow pretending 100% of responsibility rests on the employer?
Jare 8y ago
The objective is also to ensure that the structural problems do not prevent you from finding, attracting and/or promoting great candidates from underrepresented groups. The default process does not let them shine, and does not appreciate the value in the diversity that they bring to a team. If I'm going to set up a medical team, I don't want the best and most lauded 4 surgeons in the world, I want only 1 of those so I can also have the best anesthesist (sp?), the best physio, the best psychologist... you get the idea. (Edit not you in particular, of course... I mean everyone) "Culture fit" has become an accepted "soft" value for which a technically superior candidate may be passed over; why this resistance to diversity as a soft value too? New points of view, new mental patterns, new sources of inspiration... that is better than the same pov repeated 4 times. Why does it need to be explained over and over? (we know why, whether we like it or not) It doesn't mean diversity takes precedence over other soft or hard skills and valuable aspects of a candidate, it just means it takes is place among them.
benmw333 8y ago
From the very beginning you're adverse to speaking to those that do not agree with your viewpoints? Unpopular opinion: I don't care about diversity. I care about being an individual and finding my own ways around obstacles in life, a strong family unit, consistent values - practiced daily. As for Sophia - it's not society's job to ensure your comfort. Sophia is a biological white male, no? I guess that makes your crusade easier when you despise what you once were.
- perfmode 8y ago
  You're fortunate to be in a position where there are no structural obstacles impeding your progress. Show some consideration for those who aren't.
  - anon12345690 8y ago
    how do you know anything about that person?
- matthewmacleod 8y ago
  Without meaning to be too cruel, you don’t sound like a very nice person. You should care about diversity, because it’s an inherent good. If you have no diversity, you are missing part of the picture. Your family values, for instance, might be different from others. And let’s be clear, describing transgender people as “despising what they once were” is not a very acceptable view.
  - anon12345690 8y ago
    people only think of diversity in skin color which is the problem
anon12345690 8y ago
nothing structural stopped you and the evidence is that you got the job you want why does it matter so much that other people look just like you? why cant you look past other peoples skin color?

Dirlewanger 8y ago

People need to realize that men and women are biologically different, are interested in different things, and that there's nothing wrong with that. It's happening, but slowly. The Atlantic had an article not too long ago covering a study showing this (unfortunately they didn't draw any bigconclusions). Norway, one of the most gender-diverse countries in the world, (most likely) pulled funding from their Norwegian Gender Institute when a TV documentary about the differences between the sexes aired. This friction between sexes is ruining the workplace all because certain groups have political axes to grind. Men dominating e.g. construction/technical fields and women dominating nursing/education fields isn't some grand cultural conspiracy to keep the sexes on certain tracks for life; that's just what we each are good at.

fzeroracer 8y ago
Can you explain what biological changes women went through in the 1980s that would suddenly cause a large dropoff of women studying in computer science [1]? [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when...

anon12345690 8y ago

never because diversity just means skin color which is racist but nobody will admit it