> 40% of female employees reported that their gender hurt their chances of getting hired or landing senior roles in tech. How could the people who answered thi

> 40% of female employees reported that their gender hurt their chances of getting hired or landing senior roles in tech. How could the people who answered this possibly know that? Were they told to their face that "I won't hire you because you're a female"? Just because the person who was hired was male, doesn't mean the employer didn't want a female, they just chose somebody who happened to be male instead. I find it hard to believe that 40% of female employees had their chances hurt due to their gender. > 80% of founders believe having a more diverse team will have a direct positive impact on the value of their startup. > And for employees it’s becoming non-optional. Those who believe their leadership isn't prioritizing diversity and inclusion are 3x as likely to anticipate leaving their company within the next year (34% vs. 11%). Becoming non-optional? So 80% of founders are prioritizing "diversity" (whatever that means) ... but only 34% of employees actually care? This is hardly non-optional. Once again shows the disconnect between the employers and employees in-terms of what they perceive as being important.