6 ms·

> Diversity, equity, and inclusion are important to us. We know that diverse teams are more successful, and we work hard to ensure everyone is treated fairly an

> Diversity, equity, and inclusion are important to us. We know that diverse teams are more successful, and we work hard to ensure everyone is treated fairly and respectfully. That’s a bit about what these values mean to us; what do diversity, equity, and inclusion mean to you? Ugh, this question really made me cringe. Interviewers are in a position of power over interviewees, and the whole point of a job interview is to assess a candidate. The fact is that if an interviewer doesn't like the answer, it will reflect negatively on the interviewee. If you're in a majority group, I'd suggest seriously re-thinking whether to ask this question to a candidate from a minority group, at least during an assessment. After they've been onboarded? Sure. But not while you're in a position of power over them.

eat_veggies 6y ago
> the whole point of a job interview is to assess a candidate. The fact is that if an interviewer doesn't like the answer, it will reflect negatively on the interviewee. Yeah, they don't ask this question just for fun. They write in the background section that the purpose is "It selects for candidates who share these values [...] if they believe that this is all just political correctness gone wrong, or that white people are really the oppressed ones, they aren’t going to be able to work well with me and my teams." So I'm not sure why they'd wait to do this evaluation until after onboarding. You also seem to think that the only time the company has a position of power over the employee is during the interview process. But generally the boss/HR has power over the worker even after onboarding (a different kind -- to fire rather than hire), so I'm not sure where your power analysis is grounded...
- cobraetor 6y ago
  I agree that it is definitely something they should bring up as early in the interview process as possible. If a company strongly identifies with neoracism[1], I'd like to avoid wasting my time interviewing with them. And I'm a POC! [1] https://www.persuasion.community/p/john-mcwhorter-the-neoracists https://www.persuasion.community/p/john-mcwhorter-the-neorac...
- quicklime 6y ago
  >But generally the boss/HR has power over the worker even after onboarding (a different kind -- to fire rather than hire) I agree, but it's a matter of degree. In practice, it's significantly easier to reject a candidate than it is to fire an employee.
HarryHirsch 6y ago
You should absolutely ask the diversity question to members of minority groups because they are not immune to having strange ideas about diversity, inclusion and especially equity. When your interviewer is a genderqueer woman, and she tells you that she has trouble working with men (that really happened) you appreciate the honesty, and then you run as fast as you can. That was a bridge-burning move from that company.
BurningFrog 6y ago
I would hear that question as a political filter: "We only hire leftists".
- eat_veggies 6y ago
  you don't have to be a leftist to know diversity is a good thing
  - rgoulter 6y ago
    Words can be loaded with political affiliation. The way you choose to say "we want everyone to feel welcome" might (unintentionally) make some people feel that they're not actually welcome.
  - AmericanChopper 6y ago
    There is nothing inherently good or bad ethnic diversity. What is inherently good is to not treat people any differently because of their ethnic/gender/sexuality... group membership. But that’s not the objective of HR diversity programs. Those programs are designed to introduce race based (or gender based, or sexuality based...) decisions into the hiring and promotion processes. You can form your own opinion on whether that’s a good or bad thing, but it’s certainly not universally agreed upon as a good thing (in fact it’s quite controversial), and it certainly is a common element in “progressive left” ideologies. However, I would also very much appreciate knowing whether a company has such policies as early in the hiring process as possible.
    - atq2119 6y ago
      > There is nothing inherently good or bad ethnic diversity. Depends on the context. For example, if your user base is diverse, it can be larger than if it wasn't - the total potential market is larger. So, diversity is profitable in that context. Serving a diverse user base well is potentially easier with diverse staff. Remember those "Falsehoods programmers believe about X" articles? With a diverse team, chances are higher that those falsehoods are caught early, because the team covers a broader range of life experiences. So, diversity is good in that context. How much of an impact this argument has depends on the concrete role, of course. My work tends to be very low on the overall software stack, and the notion that diversity helps seems very weak there. At the very least, I expect that diversity of thought or actual neurodiversity matters more than ethnic or gender diversity.
zug_zug 6y ago
Agreed, even as somebody liberal-leaning, I think overtly politic-checking somebody like this is tacky and a red-flag. It says to me that this employer can't separate work and politics.
toast0 6y ago
> If you're in a majority group, I'd suggest seriously re-thinking whether to ask this question to a candidate from a minority group, at least during an assessment. Running the interview differently because of which (presumably protected) classes you judge the interviewee to be in is a big red flag. If you're not comfortable asking the question to some people, you shouldn't ask it. Anyway, this question feels like a gotcha more than anything. You're supposed to say the right thing, not demonstrate it. Hiring people because they said the right thing rather than because they demonstrated the thing is a great way to get bamboozled. If your company is doing well with diversity, inclusion, and equity, your interview team will likely be diverse. If a candidate won't work well in that environment, they'll likely make it known during the interview, or self select out. If your company is not very diverse, or at least if the interviewers aren't, the question feels even more sketch. If it's an important pillar of the company, by all means spend a few minutes telling candidates about it and if the candidate says or does something that raises a flag, handle it.
worker767424 6y ago
I can't believe they have the balls to ask that. It's too easy to accidentally imply that the company discriminates against a protected class.

eat_veggies 6y ago

> the whole point of a job interview is to assess a candidate. The fact is that if an interviewer doesn't like the answer, it will reflect negatively on the interviewee. Yeah, they don't ask this question just for fun. They write in the background section that the purpose is "It selects for candidates who share these values [...] if they believe that this is all just political correctness gone wrong, or that white people are really the oppressed ones, they aren’t going to be able to work well with me and my teams." So I'm not sure why they'd wait to do this evaluation until after onboarding. You also seem to think that the only time the company has a position of power over the employee is during the interview process. But generally the boss/HR has power over the worker even after onboarding (a different kind -- to fire rather than hire), so I'm not sure where your power analysis is grounded...

cobraetor 6y ago
I agree that it is definitely something they should bring up as early in the interview process as possible. If a company strongly identifies with neoracism[1], I'd like to avoid wasting my time interviewing with them. And I'm a POC! [1] https://www.persuasion.community/p/john-mcwhorter-the-neoracists https://www.persuasion.community/p/john-mcwhorter-the-neorac...
quicklime 6y ago
>But generally the boss/HR has power over the worker even after onboarding (a different kind -- to fire rather than hire) I agree, but it's a matter of degree. In practice, it's significantly easier to reject a candidate than it is to fire an employee.

HarryHirsch 6y ago

You should absolutely ask the diversity question to members of minority groups because they are not immune to having strange ideas about diversity, inclusion and especially equity. When your interviewer is a genderqueer woman, and she tells you that she has trouble working with men (that really happened) you appreciate the honesty, and then you run as fast as you can. That was a bridge-burning move from that company.

BurningFrog 6y ago

I would hear that question as a political filter: "We only hire leftists".

eat_veggies 6y ago
you don't have to be a leftist to know diversity is a good thing
- rgoulter 6y ago
  Words can be loaded with political affiliation. The way you choose to say "we want everyone to feel welcome" might (unintentionally) make some people feel that they're not actually welcome.
- AmericanChopper 6y ago
  There is nothing inherently good or bad ethnic diversity. What is inherently good is to not treat people any differently because of their ethnic/gender/sexuality... group membership. But that’s not the objective of HR diversity programs. Those programs are designed to introduce race based (or gender based, or sexuality based...) decisions into the hiring and promotion processes. You can form your own opinion on whether that’s a good or bad thing, but it’s certainly not universally agreed upon as a good thing (in fact it’s quite controversial), and it certainly is a common element in “progressive left” ideologies. However, I would also very much appreciate knowing whether a company has such policies as early in the hiring process as possible.
  - atq2119 6y ago
    > There is nothing inherently good or bad ethnic diversity. Depends on the context. For example, if your user base is diverse, it can be larger than if it wasn't - the total potential market is larger. So, diversity is profitable in that context. Serving a diverse user base well is potentially easier with diverse staff. Remember those "Falsehoods programmers believe about X" articles? With a diverse team, chances are higher that those falsehoods are caught early, because the team covers a broader range of life experiences. So, diversity is good in that context. How much of an impact this argument has depends on the concrete role, of course. My work tends to be very low on the overall software stack, and the notion that diversity helps seems very weak there. At the very least, I expect that diversity of thought or actual neurodiversity matters more than ethnic or gender diversity.

zug_zug 6y ago

Agreed, even as somebody liberal-leaning, I think overtly politic-checking somebody like this is tacky and a red-flag. It says to me that this employer can't separate work and politics.

toast0 6y ago

> If you're in a majority group, I'd suggest seriously re-thinking whether to ask this question to a candidate from a minority group, at least during an assessment. Running the interview differently because of which (presumably protected) classes you judge the interviewee to be in is a big red flag. If you're not comfortable asking the question to some people, you shouldn't ask it. Anyway, this question feels like a gotcha more than anything. You're supposed to say the right thing, not demonstrate it. Hiring people because they said the right thing rather than because they demonstrated the thing is a great way to get bamboozled. If your company is doing well with diversity, inclusion, and equity, your interview team will likely be diverse. If a candidate won't work well in that environment, they'll likely make it known during the interview, or self select out. If your company is not very diverse, or at least if the interviewers aren't, the question feels even more sketch. If it's an important pillar of the company, by all means spend a few minutes telling candidates about it and if the candidate says or does something that raises a flag, handle it.

worker767424 6y ago

I can't believe they have the balls to ask that. It's too easy to accidentally imply that the company discriminates against a protected class.