8 ms·

DEI is all the rage right now. My company's last big survey had some question which stated "I feel like I can be myself at work." The score wasn't as nice as fo

DEI is all the rage right now. My company's last big survey had some question which stated "I feel like I can be myself at work." The score wasn't as nice as folks would have liked, and apparently what HR took from that is "we're not doing DEI hard enough." Which is a pretty unfortunate set of blinders to have on. DEI is probably one of the more narrow reasons these days that someone might not feel that they can be themselves at work.

version_five 4y ago
I would say that the existence of those DEI programs is probably one of the biggest reasons people can't be themselves at work
- peanuty1 4y ago
  It's striking how much tech workers decry DEI on anonymous forums like Blind compared to the complete lack of dissent on workplace communications channels like Slack.
  - version_five 4y ago
    It's a prisoner's dilemma situation. Most people think it's BS, but the incentive to push back on it individually is almost nonexistent (because of the big downside) and so collectively we reach a shitty local minimum that could be overcome if everybody acted together.
  - ramphastidae 4y ago
    You first?
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    At Dropbox in 2015 we had a diversity all hands in the fall or winter (November IIRC). Arden (head of HR at the time) flipped out when someone posted the question about more permissive hiring standards for women and URM. Then we conducted and anonymous survey asking people if our hiring process favored women and URM candidate and 83% said yes. Very awkward for leadership.
- __float 4y ago
  I don't understand. What specifically is "the existence of those DEI programs" preventing you from saying or doing at work?
  - fullshark 4y ago
    Fear of open communication because not using the exact DEI approved phrasing means HR retribution or even firing.
  - dudul 4y ago
    A few jobs ago, as a hiring manager I was "invited" to always move female applicants to the phone screen stage. Regardless of the content of the resume. I would have liked to be brave enough to refuse and say that it was stupid. Instead I just wasted 30minutes of my time once in a while.
  - crackercrews 4y ago
    > What specifically is "the existence of those DEI programs" preventing you from saying or doing at work? If the program merely existed, that would be one thing. But if the company is spending millions and talking about their dedication to increasing URM representation, that makes it clear that dissent is not welcome.
  - midoridensha 4y ago
    This is kinda silly and should be obvious: I don't believe this myself as I'm not religious, but if someone is a conservative religious person and believes that homosexuality is "evil" and such people should be forcibly "converted" or whatever, voicing that opinion at work to actual LGBT people is not going to go over well. Of course, that opinion is anti-diversity and anti-inclusion, but threatening to fire people with these opinions is itself anti-diversity and anti-inclusion, because it's excluding conservative religious people. To go full Godwin, firing people for expressing outright fascist viewpoints is also anti-diversity: it's excluding fascists. Basically, there's no way to have true diversity and inclusion for all viewpoints, because so many viewpoints are mutually incompatible. There's simply no way to reconcile the viewpoints of two people, one of whom is LGBT (or at least pro-LGBT rights) and one of whom thinks such people should be marched into death camps. This really goes for any kind of viewpoints; you can only accept so much diversity of opinion before you get into an irreconcilable conflict. In normal polite society, we avoid this problem by simply forbidding discussion of certain topics in certain places. But that means people cannot feel safe expressing themselves fully in those places; there's simply no way to allow that as long as diversity is allowed.
- MisterBastahrd 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - version_five 4y ago
    Congrats, you're the first to bring out that silly intentional misinterpretation here. To be fair, I was expecting it a lot earlier
    - MisterBastahrd 4y ago
      Don't believe I'm the one who insinuated that the existence of DEI policies or administration at work meant that grown adults needed to adjust their behavior. That was you.
GenerocUsername 4y ago
Agree. As a white male, I have a very hard time being honest on these questionnaires because I know full well that giving good responses means they will lean in further to DEI, and giving bad responses they will lean in further on DEI... In 2021 they had a slide on the town hall for 'Whiteness down 13%' and the black host said 'we can do better'... Might as well pack up, clearly unwanted here.
- rasengan0 4y ago
  >...said 'we can do better'... 20+ years in the same company, never heard this phrase spoken by HR until the DEI craze. Now 'we can do better' is Newspeak for more surveys, townhalls, implicit bias training, more 'education' that cuts out working time in the limited hours. Bureaucracy is a Pyrrhic victory. Disclaimer: No disrespect or offense to Molossian descendants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molossians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molossians meant in usage of the term Pyrrhic
  - qzx_pierri 4y ago
    The trigger warning you added to the bottom of your post. Irony.
    - thorncorona 4y ago
      I imagine that was sarcastic.
- peanuty1 4y ago
  > In 2021 they had a slide on the town hall for 'Whiteness down 13%' and the black host said 'we can do better'... Reminds me of the controversy at Pinterest a year or two ago when an Asian engineering manager asked how we could reduce the % of Asians in the engineering org (which was 68%).
  - no_butterscotch 4y ago
    > Reminds me of the controversy at Pinterest a year or two ago when an Asian engineering manager asked how we could reduce the % of Asians in the engineering org (which was 68%). I remember this. Even on Blind today he's referred to as "Mr. 68". It was an interesting exchange because it revealed to many of the company's Asian engineers that they were overrepresented (which could be visually confirmed at any meeting) and that their overrepresentation was something being thought about behind the scenes by the DEI folks at the company. The axiom "when the future arrives it's not the future we want" or "when change happens it's not the change we asked for" seems to hold true here. I think most Asians supported these diversity initiatives at first, but now they're getting "Harvard-ed" or "Ive Leagued" and are losing out due to their ? over-performance ? in the tech space. There was also discussion of over-representation relative to the population around them. In the case of Pinterest they are in the SF Bay Area, which has a lot of Asians but is not made up of 68% Asians leading to the status as over-represented at PINS.
mountainb 4y ago
If I applied for some kind of corporate dispensation to openly pray the rosary at regular intervals and have a little shrine on my desk, would I be treated equally to an employee with a little trans flag display on their desk? Surely one is more socially acceptable than the other, but couldn't the simultaneous observance of both accommodations create an uncomfortable workplace environment for both of them? If I were a Muslim with one legally recognized wife and two common law wives, could I bring all three of them to a corporate event and introduce them as my wives? Surely such an employee is also entitled to five prayer breaks, with facilities adequate to support the correct movements (this type of fact pattern has lead to much recent litigation and multiple 8-9 figure settlements). If I were a practitioner of some version reconstructed Roman paganism, would I be permitted to perform the sacrificial augury ritual during a quarterly budget meeting? If not, why not? Should Scientologists be permitted to administer e-meters to co-workers on company property during mealtimes and other breaks? Should a Jewish employee be permitted to wear a Star of David flag pin to work if it causes offense to Palestinian employees working at the same facility? If not, why not? Should a Black Hebrew Israelite be permitted to discuss popular documentary films produced by their co-religionists on religious topics with co-workers on company property, given that such beliefs are intrinsic to their religious identities, or should they be terminated for even mentioning content from such films because it can cause offense to others? In practice our corporations require a sort of rainbow-neutered-prozac-addicted-egalitarian-Protestant-tinged secularism, but the expansive rhetoric invites a lot of limit-pushing behavior. It cannot possibly be stable, but I think all those fascinating contradictions help to explain why so many corporate employees eat so many pills every single day.
- projectazorian 4y ago
  > If I applied for some kind of corporate dispensation to openly pray the rosary at regular intervals and have a little shrine on my desk, would I be treated equally to an employee with a little trans flag display on their desk? Surely one is more socially acceptable than the other, but couldn't the simultaneous observance of both accommodations create an uncomfortable workplace environment for both of them? Yes it would probably be permitted, but I think most people would know you are trolling, and I also doubt this hypothetical trans employee would really care much > If I were a Muslim with one legally recognized wife and two common law wives, could I bring all three of them to a corporate event and introduce them as my wives? Surely such an employee is also entitled to five prayer breaks, with facilities adequate to support the correct movements (this type of fact pattern has lead to much recent litigation and multiple 8-9 figure settlements). Many corporate campuses have facilities available for use as prayer rooms, this isn’t that unusual. As for “this fact pattern has led to “multiple 8-9 figure settlements,” going to need a citation on that one > If I were a practitioner of some version reconstructed Roman paganism, would I be permitted to perform the sacrificial augury ritual during a quarterly budget meeting? If not, why not? This is trolling, not going to bother to respond to this one > Should Scientologists be permitted to administer e-meters to co-workers on company property during mealtimes and other breaks? Non-solicitation policies prohibit this sort of thing, which is one reason why most employers have them > Should a Jewish employee be permitted to wear a Star of David flag pin to work if it causes offense to Palestinian employees working at the same facility? If not, why not? Permitted? Probably yes, if it follows the corporate dress code, but expressing opinions on controversial political topics at work often has informal implications for one career > Should a Black Hebrew Israelite be permitted to discuss popular documentary films produced by their co-religionists on religious topics with co-workers on company property, given that such beliefs are intrinsic to their religious identities, or should they be terminated for even mentioning content from such films because it can cause offense to others? Non-solicitation would prohibit this (also again trolling)
golemotron 4y ago
> My company's last big survey had some question which stated "I feel like I can be myself at work." That might be the worst goal for any workplace. There are clearly parts of ourselves that have no place at work.
crackercrews 4y ago
I was recently sent a survey whose questions all presupposed that DEI should be critical organizational goal. The questions only let you say that the organization was accomplishing its DEI goals, or was not doing enough. There was no way to suggest that the organization was spending too much time on DEI. I learned that the survey was created by an equity consulting company. They were paid tens of thousands of dollars for their bogus survey and equity audit.
- fwungy 4y ago
  I always say they're doing a really good job so someone can argue that they don't need to keep pushing it more. They are doing a good job. Why create a good product? That's difficult and failure is possible. Much more fun to work on the diversity stats, because quota hiring is an easy win at review time. Who cares if strategic hiring is bad? Big companies have enough process inertia that no one will know if the new hires are working out for years.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  Most likely, the reason you were sent this survey is because the organization has already decided on its priorities, and was looking to evaluate its success at acheiving them, not questioning them.
  - crackercrews 4y ago
    Yes, that's why it was no surprise when I heard that this was driven by an equity consulting firm. They have no interest in finding out if respondents think that too much time is being spent on equity.
  - PradeetPatel 4y ago
    ^ That, also this is an extremely effective way at identifying problematic individuals whose values don't align with the organisation's objectives. The HR department at my previous employment sent out a similar survey last year, with the intention to identify, and remove troublesome individuals during a period of downsizing. Needless to say it was quite effective.
Macha 4y ago
I don't think HR reading the answer they want to take away from the survey is necessarily limited to DEI either. My previous company had been formed by the merger of many acquisitions, and had a big company wide strategy around a product that only really mattered to the biggest unit. Imagine being at Beats' hardware division and being told that the important strategy for Apple is app store installation counts. (The example company wasn't Apple, but it was a similar example for the company). Sure, you could focus the entire business unit's work on an app to control the headphones and everyone could say they were focused on the company's primary objective, but it hardly seems the most important thing for Beats to do with their products. They then included in their quarterly survey questions how connected people feel with that strategy. When the unrelated units scored quite poorly on this subject, they decided the reason was that the line managers had failed to educate their reports on the importance of this strategy enough, so started marking them all on how connected their reports felt and giving out educational material so people could understand the strategy, missing that people understood the strategy well enough, it just there was no meaningful connection to their business unit to understand.
anonymouskimmer 4y ago
> "My company's last big survey had some question which stated "I feel like I can be myself at work." The score wasn't as nice as folks would have liked, and apparently what HR took from that is "we're not doing DEI hard enough."" Mine had a comment box for each question and for this one I just stated that it's wildly inappropriate to be your home self at work. You should be your work self at work.

version_five 4y ago

I would say that the existence of those DEI programs is probably one of the biggest reasons people can't be themselves at work

peanuty1 4y ago
It's striking how much tech workers decry DEI on anonymous forums like Blind compared to the complete lack of dissent on workplace communications channels like Slack.
- version_five 4y ago
  It's a prisoner's dilemma situation. Most people think it's BS, but the incentive to push back on it individually is almost nonexistent (because of the big downside) and so collectively we reach a shitty local minimum that could be overcome if everybody acted together.
- ramphastidae 4y ago
  You first?
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  At Dropbox in 2015 we had a diversity all hands in the fall or winter (November IIRC). Arden (head of HR at the time) flipped out when someone posted the question about more permissive hiring standards for women and URM. Then we conducted and anonymous survey asking people if our hiring process favored women and URM candidate and 83% said yes. Very awkward for leadership.
__float 4y ago
I don't understand. What specifically is "the existence of those DEI programs" preventing you from saying or doing at work?
- fullshark 4y ago
  Fear of open communication because not using the exact DEI approved phrasing means HR retribution or even firing.
- dudul 4y ago
  A few jobs ago, as a hiring manager I was "invited" to always move female applicants to the phone screen stage. Regardless of the content of the resume. I would have liked to be brave enough to refuse and say that it was stupid. Instead I just wasted 30minutes of my time once in a while.
- crackercrews 4y ago
  > What specifically is "the existence of those DEI programs" preventing you from saying or doing at work? If the program merely existed, that would be one thing. But if the company is spending millions and talking about their dedication to increasing URM representation, that makes it clear that dissent is not welcome.
- midoridensha 4y ago
  This is kinda silly and should be obvious: I don't believe this myself as I'm not religious, but if someone is a conservative religious person and believes that homosexuality is "evil" and such people should be forcibly "converted" or whatever, voicing that opinion at work to actual LGBT people is not going to go over well. Of course, that opinion is anti-diversity and anti-inclusion, but threatening to fire people with these opinions is itself anti-diversity and anti-inclusion, because it's excluding conservative religious people. To go full Godwin, firing people for expressing outright fascist viewpoints is also anti-diversity: it's excluding fascists. Basically, there's no way to have true diversity and inclusion for all viewpoints, because so many viewpoints are mutually incompatible. There's simply no way to reconcile the viewpoints of two people, one of whom is LGBT (or at least pro-LGBT rights) and one of whom thinks such people should be marched into death camps. This really goes for any kind of viewpoints; you can only accept so much diversity of opinion before you get into an irreconcilable conflict. In normal polite society, we avoid this problem by simply forbidding discussion of certain topics in certain places. But that means people cannot feel safe expressing themselves fully in those places; there's simply no way to allow that as long as diversity is allowed.
MisterBastahrd 4y ago
[flagged]
- version_five 4y ago
  Congrats, you're the first to bring out that silly intentional misinterpretation here. To be fair, I was expecting it a lot earlier
  - MisterBastahrd 4y ago
    Don't believe I'm the one who insinuated that the existence of DEI policies or administration at work meant that grown adults needed to adjust their behavior. That was you.

GenerocUsername 4y ago

Agree. As a white male, I have a very hard time being honest on these questionnaires because I know full well that giving good responses means they will lean in further to DEI, and giving bad responses they will lean in further on DEI... In 2021 they had a slide on the town hall for 'Whiteness down 13%' and the black host said 'we can do better'... Might as well pack up, clearly unwanted here.

rasengan0 4y ago
>...said 'we can do better'... 20+ years in the same company, never heard this phrase spoken by HR until the DEI craze. Now 'we can do better' is Newspeak for more surveys, townhalls, implicit bias training, more 'education' that cuts out working time in the limited hours. Bureaucracy is a Pyrrhic victory. Disclaimer: No disrespect or offense to Molossian descendants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molossians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molossians meant in usage of the term Pyrrhic
- qzx_pierri 4y ago
  The trigger warning you added to the bottom of your post. Irony.
  - thorncorona 4y ago
    I imagine that was sarcastic.
peanuty1 4y ago
> In 2021 they had a slide on the town hall for 'Whiteness down 13%' and the black host said 'we can do better'... Reminds me of the controversy at Pinterest a year or two ago when an Asian engineering manager asked how we could reduce the % of Asians in the engineering org (which was 68%).
- no_butterscotch 4y ago
  > Reminds me of the controversy at Pinterest a year or two ago when an Asian engineering manager asked how we could reduce the % of Asians in the engineering org (which was 68%). I remember this. Even on Blind today he's referred to as "Mr. 68". It was an interesting exchange because it revealed to many of the company's Asian engineers that they were overrepresented (which could be visually confirmed at any meeting) and that their overrepresentation was something being thought about behind the scenes by the DEI folks at the company. The axiom "when the future arrives it's not the future we want" or "when change happens it's not the change we asked for" seems to hold true here. I think most Asians supported these diversity initiatives at first, but now they're getting "Harvard-ed" or "Ive Leagued" and are losing out due to their ? over-performance ? in the tech space. There was also discussion of over-representation relative to the population around them. In the case of Pinterest they are in the SF Bay Area, which has a lot of Asians but is not made up of 68% Asians leading to the status as over-represented at PINS.

mountainb 4y ago

If I applied for some kind of corporate dispensation to openly pray the rosary at regular intervals and have a little shrine on my desk, would I be treated equally to an employee with a little trans flag display on their desk? Surely one is more socially acceptable than the other, but couldn't the simultaneous observance of both accommodations create an uncomfortable workplace environment for both of them? If I were a Muslim with one legally recognized wife and two common law wives, could I bring all three of them to a corporate event and introduce them as my wives? Surely such an employee is also entitled to five prayer breaks, with facilities adequate to support the correct movements (this type of fact pattern has lead to much recent litigation and multiple 8-9 figure settlements). If I were a practitioner of some version reconstructed Roman paganism, would I be permitted to perform the sacrificial augury ritual during a quarterly budget meeting? If not, why not? Should Scientologists be permitted to administer e-meters to co-workers on company property during mealtimes and other breaks? Should a Jewish employee be permitted to wear a Star of David flag pin to work if it causes offense to Palestinian employees working at the same facility? If not, why not? Should a Black Hebrew Israelite be permitted to discuss popular documentary films produced by their co-religionists on religious topics with co-workers on company property, given that such beliefs are intrinsic to their religious identities, or should they be terminated for even mentioning content from such films because it can cause offense to others? In practice our corporations require a sort of rainbow-neutered-prozac-addicted-egalitarian-Protestant-tinged secularism, but the expansive rhetoric invites a lot of limit-pushing behavior. It cannot possibly be stable, but I think all those fascinating contradictions help to explain why so many corporate employees eat so many pills every single day.

projectazorian 4y ago
> If I applied for some kind of corporate dispensation to openly pray the rosary at regular intervals and have a little shrine on my desk, would I be treated equally to an employee with a little trans flag display on their desk? Surely one is more socially acceptable than the other, but couldn't the simultaneous observance of both accommodations create an uncomfortable workplace environment for both of them? Yes it would probably be permitted, but I think most people would know you are trolling, and I also doubt this hypothetical trans employee would really care much > If I were a Muslim with one legally recognized wife and two common law wives, could I bring all three of them to a corporate event and introduce them as my wives? Surely such an employee is also entitled to five prayer breaks, with facilities adequate to support the correct movements (this type of fact pattern has lead to much recent litigation and multiple 8-9 figure settlements). Many corporate campuses have facilities available for use as prayer rooms, this isn’t that unusual. As for “this fact pattern has led to “multiple 8-9 figure settlements,” going to need a citation on that one > If I were a practitioner of some version reconstructed Roman paganism, would I be permitted to perform the sacrificial augury ritual during a quarterly budget meeting? If not, why not? This is trolling, not going to bother to respond to this one > Should Scientologists be permitted to administer e-meters to co-workers on company property during mealtimes and other breaks? Non-solicitation policies prohibit this sort of thing, which is one reason why most employers have them > Should a Jewish employee be permitted to wear a Star of David flag pin to work if it causes offense to Palestinian employees working at the same facility? If not, why not? Permitted? Probably yes, if it follows the corporate dress code, but expressing opinions on controversial political topics at work often has informal implications for one career > Should a Black Hebrew Israelite be permitted to discuss popular documentary films produced by their co-religionists on religious topics with co-workers on company property, given that such beliefs are intrinsic to their religious identities, or should they be terminated for even mentioning content from such films because it can cause offense to others? Non-solicitation would prohibit this (also again trolling)

golemotron 4y ago

> My company's last big survey had some question which stated "I feel like I can be myself at work." That might be the worst goal for any workplace. There are clearly parts of ourselves that have no place at work.

crackercrews 4y ago

I was recently sent a survey whose questions all presupposed that DEI should be critical organizational goal. The questions only let you say that the organization was accomplishing its DEI goals, or was not doing enough. There was no way to suggest that the organization was spending too much time on DEI. I learned that the survey was created by an equity consulting company. They were paid tens of thousands of dollars for their bogus survey and equity audit.

fwungy 4y ago
I always say they're doing a really good job so someone can argue that they don't need to keep pushing it more. They are doing a good job. Why create a good product? That's difficult and failure is possible. Much more fun to work on the diversity stats, because quota hiring is an easy win at review time. Who cares if strategic hiring is bad? Big companies have enough process inertia that no one will know if the new hires are working out for years.
dragonwriter 4y ago
Most likely, the reason you were sent this survey is because the organization has already decided on its priorities, and was looking to evaluate its success at acheiving them, not questioning them.
- crackercrews 4y ago
  Yes, that's why it was no surprise when I heard that this was driven by an equity consulting firm. They have no interest in finding out if respondents think that too much time is being spent on equity.
- PradeetPatel 4y ago
  ^ That, also this is an extremely effective way at identifying problematic individuals whose values don't align with the organisation's objectives. The HR department at my previous employment sent out a similar survey last year, with the intention to identify, and remove troublesome individuals during a period of downsizing. Needless to say it was quite effective.

Macha 4y ago

I don't think HR reading the answer they want to take away from the survey is necessarily limited to DEI either. My previous company had been formed by the merger of many acquisitions, and had a big company wide strategy around a product that only really mattered to the biggest unit. Imagine being at Beats' hardware division and being told that the important strategy for Apple is app store installation counts. (The example company wasn't Apple, but it was a similar example for the company). Sure, you could focus the entire business unit's work on an app to control the headphones and everyone could say they were focused on the company's primary objective, but it hardly seems the most important thing for Beats to do with their products. They then included in their quarterly survey questions how connected people feel with that strategy. When the unrelated units scored quite poorly on this subject, they decided the reason was that the line managers had failed to educate their reports on the importance of this strategy enough, so started marking them all on how connected their reports felt and giving out educational material so people could understand the strategy, missing that people understood the strategy well enough, it just there was no meaningful connection to their business unit to understand.

anonymouskimmer 4y ago

> "My company's last big survey had some question which stated "I feel like I can be myself at work." The score wasn't as nice as folks would have liked, and apparently what HR took from that is "we're not doing DEI hard enough."" Mine had a comment box for each question and for this one I just stated that it's wildly inappropriate to be your home self at work. You should be your work self at work.