4 ms·

"But this isn’t soley about race, nationality or gender, you have to find a good mix also in terms of personalities, skillsets etc" To my mind, this is the key

"But this isn’t soley about race, nationality or gender, you have to find a good mix also in terms of personalities, skillsets etc" To my mind, this is the key point. It may be likely that a team with e.g. diverse skills/personalities will end up being gender diverse. But to assume that it has to be gender diverse, or that you can achieve a diversely skilled team by enforcing gender diversity seems to lapse into lazy gender stereotyping about how e.g. women's skills/perspectives are limited by their gender.

atoav 7y ago
I think you have to try to seperate skill and background. If somebody has sufficient skill, you can decide based on their background. And then you should make a systemic decision: a new person affects the whole team, and how people distribute functions within the group. Bringing in the right person with a different background on the right spot can do wonders. And by background I surely mean gender, but also things like educational background, nationality, personality etc. Nobody should brute force for gender diversity just for the symbolic victory. Diversity done right has its benefits, but like all paradigms you have to use your brains when implementing it. Refusing to do so and then after a half assed attempt declaring it doesn’t work, is what you sadly witness quite often. I know multiple women in tech and every single one of them had their gender used against them many times during their careers. Hiring men and women like in regular fields won’t hurt tech at all. I don’t really get why it has to be a big thing at all.
- scooble 7y ago
  You seem to have missed my point. Gender is important to team balance only if we assume that someone's gender defines how they can contribute to a team. This assumption is lazy gender stereotyping. It is the very same assumption that hurts women's careers because people assume that women's contributions will be limited by their gender. If you want someone who can contribute to a team in a certain way, then hire for that.

atoav 7y ago

I think you have to try to seperate skill and background. If somebody has sufficient skill, you can decide based on their background. And then you should make a systemic decision: a new person affects the whole team, and how people distribute functions within the group. Bringing in the right person with a different background on the right spot can do wonders. And by background I surely mean gender, but also things like educational background, nationality, personality etc. Nobody should brute force for gender diversity just for the symbolic victory. Diversity done right has its benefits, but like all paradigms you have to use your brains when implementing it. Refusing to do so and then after a half assed attempt declaring it doesn’t work, is what you sadly witness quite often. I know multiple women in tech and every single one of them had their gender used against them many times during their careers. Hiring men and women like in regular fields won’t hurt tech at all. I don’t really get why it has to be a big thing at all.

scooble 7y ago
You seem to have missed my point. Gender is important to team balance only if we assume that someone's gender defines how they can contribute to a team. This assumption is lazy gender stereotyping. It is the very same assumption that hurts women's careers because people assume that women's contributions will be limited by their gender. If you want someone who can contribute to a team in a certain way, then hire for that.