8 ms·

The increase from 3.7% to 5.6% black executives as a sign of lowering standards, when black people are 14% of the population in the country... Can we first esta

The increase from 3.7% to 5.6% black executives as a sign of lowering standards, when black people are 14% of the population in the country... Can we first establish what percentage of managers people genuinely think got their job based on merit as a baseline? An equal explanation might be that because Microsoft forced people to actually interview black people at all, more qualified black candidates were hired.

truetotest 4y ago
seti0Cha 4y ago
That represents the population at large, not the percentage of job applicants. Without knowing that number, you can't know how reasonable such a rule is.
- PuppyTailWags 4y ago
  Yeah, neither can we know how reasonable the implication of lack of merit is in that case.
  - seti0Cha 4y ago
    The claim is that there may be a lack of availability. Lack of availability does not imply lack of merit. Prior discrimination, for example, could explain a lack of availability.
BiteCode_dev 4y ago
Yes, but if you are looking at the population of rust dev with a background in system coding, or telecom engineer with ciso certification, the stats don't look like the ones of the general population at all. In my university, in the whole class, we had 0 non white, and a single woman. Now, you may argue that we should fix that. But that's another debate, the thing is, people are hiring from the pool we have right now.
- PuppyTailWags 4y ago
  Right, but these aren't that. These are just generic executives. So like, just rando leaders in accounting and HR and sales. The comparison would be if in your entire university campus only white students existed.
  - BiteCode_dev 4y ago
    Some departments are indeed not as affected, and if you are looking for a product owner, a project manager, or sales, numbers don't work against you. But there are departments where they do, even outside of IT. Accounting are mostly white males, HR are mostly female, etc. So if you have one policy that is general to the whole company, some departments will have a hard time no matter what. Case in point, one of my clients has a hard time finding a good dev matching diversity policies, but they have no problem finding analysts. For some reasons, good analyst profiles already are pretty diverse and the team is rocking people from all over Europe and Africa, also achieving gender parity without even trying. Yet it's the same hiring pipeline, and we are all working in the same office. They are not excluding people, in the office, 10% only are locals! But it doesn't work for some demographics, and the general dumb rule is killing their IT projects.
- rrradical 4y ago
  It's not another debate because that debate never happens. People will use the same arguments to justify university selection, etc etc.
  - int_19h 4y ago
    The argument is "the output that we're seeing is expected given the input". So you walk the chain back until inputs and outputs diverge, at which point the argument can no longer justify it.

truetotest 4y ago

seti0Cha 4y ago

That represents the population at large, not the percentage of job applicants. Without knowing that number, you can't know how reasonable such a rule is.

PuppyTailWags 4y ago
Yeah, neither can we know how reasonable the implication of lack of merit is in that case.
- seti0Cha 4y ago
  The claim is that there may be a lack of availability. Lack of availability does not imply lack of merit. Prior discrimination, for example, could explain a lack of availability.

BiteCode_dev 4y ago

Yes, but if you are looking at the population of rust dev with a background in system coding, or telecom engineer with ciso certification, the stats don't look like the ones of the general population at all. In my university, in the whole class, we had 0 non white, and a single woman. Now, you may argue that we should fix that. But that's another debate, the thing is, people are hiring from the pool we have right now.

PuppyTailWags 4y ago
Right, but these aren't that. These are just generic executives. So like, just rando leaders in accounting and HR and sales. The comparison would be if in your entire university campus only white students existed.
- BiteCode_dev 4y ago
  Some departments are indeed not as affected, and if you are looking for a product owner, a project manager, or sales, numbers don't work against you. But there are departments where they do, even outside of IT. Accounting are mostly white males, HR are mostly female, etc. So if you have one policy that is general to the whole company, some departments will have a hard time no matter what. Case in point, one of my clients has a hard time finding a good dev matching diversity policies, but they have no problem finding analysts. For some reasons, good analyst profiles already are pretty diverse and the team is rocking people from all over Europe and Africa, also achieving gender parity without even trying. Yet it's the same hiring pipeline, and we are all working in the same office. They are not excluding people, in the office, 10% only are locals! But it doesn't work for some demographics, and the general dumb rule is killing their IT projects.
rrradical 4y ago
It's not another debate because that debate never happens. People will use the same arguments to justify university selection, etc etc.
- int_19h 4y ago
  The argument is "the output that we're seeing is expected given the input". So you walk the chain back until inputs and outputs diverge, at which point the argument can no longer justify it.