5 ms·

The biggest office politics I see these days is demographic/racial based. Big tech splits very cleanly on these lines, exceptions abound

throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
You're not paying attention then. Office politics applies to everyone. It's the one meritocratic thing about business. The person who's better at manipulating people goes to the top, regardless of race, gender, etc.
- roenxi 3y ago
  On average I expect promotions to be meritocratic; in that the further up the hierarchy we sample the more likely we are to get exceptional people. That being said, if I were looking for a career in management I'd rather be female. In most of the workplaces I've been they've got a decided advantage at promotion after controlling for motivation and political savvy; and around a third of the girls in my university year moved in to senior management positions.
  - throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
    Promotions are not meritocratic. You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you; you'll play ball, follow orders, know a secret, can do a favor, are reliable, don't ruffle feathers, under promise and over deliver, make friends easy, etc. That's not merit, that's corruption. This is true for one simple reason: Promotions are not weighed by an impartial algorithm, chosen by sorting, and doled out on a set schedule. They are submitted for consideration and approved by the powerful, when they feel like it, for whatever reasons they feel like. The further up the hierarchy you go, the less exceptional people are. It's called the Peter Principle. Even if you used to be exceptional at your job, a promotion gives you a different job. And technical skill has almost nothing to do with ability to get promoted. The only reason women might be promoted more is they're working twice as hard as the men. I'm sure if you asked them, they would rather have been men, when it comes to getting promotions. The bar would be a lot lower.
    - Exoristos 3y ago
      > You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you ... That's not merit, that's corruption. I don't see how you arrive at that description. Usefulness is a form of merit -- a very useful one. > women might be promoted more [if] they're working twice s as hard Doesn't this contradict your first assertion?
  - Exoristos 3y ago
    > the further up the hierarchy we sample the more likely we are to get exceptional people This is never consistently true, certainly not in large organizations where quality of personnel can be very variable.
  - sumedh 3y ago
    > if I were looking for a career in management I'd rather be female. Isnt there some kind of glass ceiling for women and they get paid less compared to men?
    - mlrtime 3y ago
      No, and any real studies show this is 100% false. Women get paid the same as men for the exact same job with the same performance. The studies that show the opposite are taking the pay for all women and dividing it by pay by all men (summarizing).
TRUMPQ 3y ago
[flagged]
pensatoio 3y ago
I've heard of this on HN, but never actually seen it in real life.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- upupupandaway 3y ago
  At Microsoft I was specifically told to not phone-screen female candidates -> they were to go straight to the loops. Additionally, one SDE (woman, non-white, former military) verbally abused another SDE (also a woman) during a customer call, causing the customer to call the VP and tell him this was unacceptable. I handled the case as best as I could (and was supported by the team of 60% women SDEs in doing so) and built a very strong case for the Microsoft investigators to work with. She disappeared right afterwards. Fast forward a few weeks - she was put on a leave and returned in a position 2 levels above what she used to have, working directly under a C-officer of the company.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
Completely true. All you need to do is look around at professional associations. "Women in <industry>" abounds. "Blacks in <industry>" and "Latinos in <industry>" and "<Industry> LGBTQ+ club". Identifying with one or more "minorities" is your key to networking and belonging. I grew tired of seeing groups which excluded me, so I joined some Irish and Scottish business networks. They are very small, and concentrate not on diaspora but on homegrown businesses in weird and disparate industries. At least as a Catholic, I have been able to join ministries, retreats and service organizations for men.
- kanbara 3y ago
  why do you feel excluded when your kind are likely a majority in the place you live?
  - upupupandaway 3y ago
    Maybe because being a minority is way more powerful than being a majority in today's big tech companies. And I speak this as a non-white minority.
  - zogrodea 3y ago
    It sounds reasonable to me. If others are making groups based on characteristics opposing the dominant strand of the population but the dominant strand is not making any exclusionary group like the minorities are, then the minorities may have two places to belong (the total group everyone shares and their own in-group) while the dominant strand only has one group, with no in-group.

throwawaaarrgh 3y ago

You're not paying attention then. Office politics applies to everyone. It's the one meritocratic thing about business. The person who's better at manipulating people goes to the top, regardless of race, gender, etc.

roenxi 3y ago
On average I expect promotions to be meritocratic; in that the further up the hierarchy we sample the more likely we are to get exceptional people. That being said, if I were looking for a career in management I'd rather be female. In most of the workplaces I've been they've got a decided advantage at promotion after controlling for motivation and political savvy; and around a third of the girls in my university year moved in to senior management positions.
- throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
  Promotions are not meritocratic. You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you; you'll play ball, follow orders, know a secret, can do a favor, are reliable, don't ruffle feathers, under promise and over deliver, make friends easy, etc. That's not merit, that's corruption. This is true for one simple reason: Promotions are not weighed by an impartial algorithm, chosen by sorting, and doled out on a set schedule. They are submitted for consideration and approved by the powerful, when they feel like it, for whatever reasons they feel like. The further up the hierarchy you go, the less exceptional people are. It's called the Peter Principle. Even if you used to be exceptional at your job, a promotion gives you a different job. And technical skill has almost nothing to do with ability to get promoted. The only reason women might be promoted more is they're working twice as hard as the men. I'm sure if you asked them, they would rather have been men, when it comes to getting promotions. The bar would be a lot lower.
  - Exoristos 3y ago
    > You get promoted if you are useful to the person promoting you ... That's not merit, that's corruption. I don't see how you arrive at that description. Usefulness is a form of merit -- a very useful one. > women might be promoted more [if] they're working twice s as hard Doesn't this contradict your first assertion?
- Exoristos 3y ago
  > the further up the hierarchy we sample the more likely we are to get exceptional people This is never consistently true, certainly not in large organizations where quality of personnel can be very variable.
- sumedh 3y ago
  > if I were looking for a career in management I'd rather be female. Isnt there some kind of glass ceiling for women and they get paid less compared to men?
  - mlrtime 3y ago
    No, and any real studies show this is 100% false. Women get paid the same as men for the exact same job with the same performance. The studies that show the opposite are taking the pay for all women and dividing it by pay by all men (summarizing).

TRUMPQ 3y ago

[flagged]

pensatoio 3y ago

I've heard of this on HN, but never actually seen it in real life.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
upupupandaway 3y ago
At Microsoft I was specifically told to not phone-screen female candidates -> they were to go straight to the loops. Additionally, one SDE (woman, non-white, former military) verbally abused another SDE (also a woman) during a customer call, causing the customer to call the VP and tell him this was unacceptable. I handled the case as best as I could (and was supported by the team of 60% women SDEs in doing so) and built a very strong case for the Microsoft investigators to work with. She disappeared right afterwards. Fast forward a few weeks - she was put on a leave and returned in a position 2 levels above what she used to have, working directly under a C-officer of the company.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

NoZebra120vClip 3y ago

Completely true. All you need to do is look around at professional associations. "Women in <industry>" abounds. "Blacks in <industry>" and "Latinos in <industry>" and "<Industry> LGBTQ+ club". Identifying with one or more "minorities" is your key to networking and belonging. I grew tired of seeing groups which excluded me, so I joined some Irish and Scottish business networks. They are very small, and concentrate not on diaspora but on homegrown businesses in weird and disparate industries. At least as a Catholic, I have been able to join ministries, retreats and service organizations for men.

kanbara 3y ago
why do you feel excluded when your kind are likely a majority in the place you live?
- upupupandaway 3y ago
  Maybe because being a minority is way more powerful than being a majority in today's big tech companies. And I speak this as a non-white minority.
- zogrodea 3y ago
  It sounds reasonable to me. If others are making groups based on characteristics opposing the dominant strand of the population but the dominant strand is not making any exclusionary group like the minorities are, then the minorities may have two places to belong (the total group everyone shares and their own in-group) while the dominant strand only has one group, with no in-group.