4 ms·

> Why is it supposed to be problematic for the metric to favor or skew towards one over the other? It's akin to asking whether a weightlifter or a marathon run

> Why is it supposed to be problematic for the metric to favor or skew towards one over the other? It's akin to asking whether a weightlifter or a marathon runner is more athletic. If I'm measuring athleticism by one's max jogging distance, that'll disproportionately favor the runner. If I'm measuring athleticism by one's single-rep max deadlift, that'll disproportionately favor the weightlifter. This ain't problematic per se; I might have good reason for measuring athleticism by a skewed metric (for example, because I'm the coach of a track & field team and therefore need runners more than I do weightlifters). However, if that was the case then I'd probably be explicit about that when presenting my findings rather than simply using running distance as a proxy for general athleticism. Likewise, Facebook might have good reasons to use metrics that inherently prefer in-person work and/or exclude metrics that inherently prefer remote work, but without knowing what those metrics even are (let alone why they were chosen), it's impossible to say whether findings based on those metrics are actually applicable to any organization other than Meta as it exists at this very moment.

jonny_eh 4y ago
> Facebook might have good reasons to use metrics that inherently prefer in-person work What's an example of such a metric?
zamadatix 4y ago
I guess the relation I'm failing to see in this argument is why skew or no skew is supposed to be a determining factor in whether or not the metric is to be applicable outside of Meta in the first place. Say the metric weren't skewed, you still don't know it is applicable outside Meta because you don't know what it was measuring only that what was measured didn't favor either remote or on site work. Say you knew what was measured were skewed, you still don't know if it's an applicable measurement outside of Meta. The point being while you do need to understand what was measured to be able to apply it to other companies this doesn't suggest whether the metric is skewed is what plays a part in deciding if the metric is relevant or not. The metric's point of measurement is solely what's relevant while the skew is just a property of the measurement which can sometimes be skewed and sometimes not regardless if the measurement is applicable or not. Taking this to your mention of athleticism with two examples, the first of which being athleticism by lowest BMI which skews towards runners versus weight lifters. Being skewed towards runners doesn't mean lowest BMI is a sensible metric for a coach to pick runners with it just means it's an even worse way to pick weight lifters. Similarly measuring athleticism by how many basketball shots one can make in 10 minutes may not be skewed towards one or the other but still doesn't mean it's a good way to measure a runner. The only thing relevant to know is whether the metric is one you want to optimize for. Whether or not that metric is skewed towards a certain disposition may or may not be true but regardless which it's not how you decide if the metric is one you want to optimize for.
- yellowapple 4y ago
  > I guess the relation I'm failing to see in this argument is why skew or no skew is supposed to be a determining factor in whether or not the metric is to be applicable outside of Meta in the first place. And I guess what I'm saying is that it ain't a determining factor in and of itself, but it's rather a tool to discern whether it is indeed applicable outside (or, for that matter, inside) Meta. If a metric does skew toward a specific form of "athleticism" or "productivity" at the expense of others, then it's worth asking whether there's a particular reason for using it v. it being arbitrarily selected.
  - zamadatix 4y ago
    And if a metric doesn't skew you still need to ask the same question anyways because whether the metric is arbitrary or not does not depend on skew it depends on the applicability.

jonny_eh 4y ago

> Facebook might have good reasons to use metrics that inherently prefer in-person work What's an example of such a metric?

zamadatix 4y ago

I guess the relation I'm failing to see in this argument is why skew or no skew is supposed to be a determining factor in whether or not the metric is to be applicable outside of Meta in the first place. Say the metric weren't skewed, you still don't know it is applicable outside Meta because you don't know what it was measuring only that what was measured didn't favor either remote or on site work. Say you knew what was measured were skewed, you still don't know if it's an applicable measurement outside of Meta. The point being while you do need to understand what was measured to be able to apply it to other companies this doesn't suggest whether the metric is skewed is what plays a part in deciding if the metric is relevant or not. The metric's point of measurement is solely what's relevant while the skew is just a property of the measurement which can sometimes be skewed and sometimes not regardless if the measurement is applicable or not. Taking this to your mention of athleticism with two examples, the first of which being athleticism by lowest BMI which skews towards runners versus weight lifters. Being skewed towards runners doesn't mean lowest BMI is a sensible metric for a coach to pick runners with it just means it's an even worse way to pick weight lifters. Similarly measuring athleticism by how many basketball shots one can make in 10 minutes may not be skewed towards one or the other but still doesn't mean it's a good way to measure a runner. The only thing relevant to know is whether the metric is one you want to optimize for. Whether or not that metric is skewed towards a certain disposition may or may not be true but regardless which it's not how you decide if the metric is one you want to optimize for.

yellowapple 4y ago
> I guess the relation I'm failing to see in this argument is why skew or no skew is supposed to be a determining factor in whether or not the metric is to be applicable outside of Meta in the first place. And I guess what I'm saying is that it ain't a determining factor in and of itself, but it's rather a tool to discern whether it is indeed applicable outside (or, for that matter, inside) Meta. If a metric does skew toward a specific form of "athleticism" or "productivity" at the expense of others, then it's worth asking whether there's a particular reason for using it v. it being arbitrarily selected.
- zamadatix 4y ago
  And if a metric doesn't skew you still need to ask the same question anyways because whether the metric is arbitrary or not does not depend on skew it depends on the applicability.