3 ms·

I read an article once that phrased it well regarding Asians: "we have a problem, and we are a problem, at the same time". We're "represented" in tech, but not

I read an article once that phrased it well regarding Asians: "we have a problem, and we are a problem, at the same time". We're "represented" in tech, but not at the upper echelons where we're substantially under represented, and at the same time our presence is used as justification that other races aren't being discriminated against. Asians are tremendously more privileged than Blacks or Hispanics in tech, but still suffer from tremendous problems ourselves. Many seem unable to comprehend this in a world view where privilege is binary.

yummyfajitas 12y ago
We're "represented" in tech, but not at the upper echelons where we're substantially under represented... Do you have data on this? Anecdotally it isn't hard to think of Asians in the upper echelons (e.g. Satya Nadella). A quick glance at google's management team finds Asians to be overrepresented at 4/18 Asians (6/18 if you include middle easterners). http://www.google.com/about/company/facts/management/ http://www.google.com/about/company/facts/management/ Microsoft (2/16) and Twitter (2/14) seem similar: http://news.microsoft.com/microsoft-senior-leaders/ http://news.microsoft.com/microsoft-senior-leaders/ https://about.twitter.com/company/leadership https://about.twitter.com/company/leadership (0.8/16 is what would be expected based on proportional representation.)
- potatolicious 12y ago
  > "Do you have data on this? Anecdotally it isn't hard to think of Asians in the upper echelons (e.g. Satya Nadella)." In the same way Barack Obama is evidence that black people have it pretty easy around here ;) There are definitely some high-profile Asians in tech, they're not exactly rare like unicorns, but the underrepresentation is plenty real. I dug up the original article I was reading: http://the-toast.net/2014/10/23/asian-americans-media/view-all/?utm_content=buffere0bba&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer http://the-toast.net/2014/10/23/asian-americans-media/view-a... - btw, this is IMO the most approachable/parseable summary of where Asian-Americans fit into the greater American race relations landscape I've seen yet. It's well worth a read. It's a more general look at Asian-Americans, but there is a section specifically addressing tech. More concretely giving numbers to the representation deficit: http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23100254/glass-ceiling-asian-americans-still-under-represented-silicon http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23100254/glass-ceiling-asian-a... Even in Google's own numbers Asians represent 34% of the tech workforce and 23% in leadership roles. Facebook's a bit worse - 41% of tech workforce Asian, 19% leadership. Yahoo is particularly egregious - 57% Asian, 17% leadership. Even Twitter isn't particularly great: 34% Asians in tech, 24% in leadership from their own report: https://blog.twitter.com/2014/building-a-twitter-we-can-be-proud-of https://blog.twitter.com/2014/building-a-twitter-we-can-be-p...
  - yummyfajitas 12y ago
    By those numbers, Asians are overrepresented in both tech and leadership. The real question is why they aren't more overrepresented in leadership. It's a valid question, but a different one than I was asking. Apriori I would not expect the demographics of leadership to look like those of tech. My simple model (with allusions to michaelochurch) is that tech is generally not the path to leadership. I.e., if 3% of techies go into leadership vs 5% of non-techies, then leadership demographics will look more like non-tech demographics than tech demographics.
    - potatolicious 12y ago
      The under representation exists even if we include all Asians employed at these companies - Twitter has for example a 29%/24% difference, Facebook is 24/19 when restricted to just non-tech role headcount. Yahoo comes in at 24/17 when similarly looking at just non-tech employees. The demographics of leadership actually get worse once you leave tech: Asians represent 0.8% of C-level roles, and 2.1% of board seats - against 5% in the general population. Tech is actually a relative bright spot when it comes to Asians in leadership roles. > "The real question is why they aren't more overrepresented in leadership." This really isn't the question at all. You're conflating two separate problems: over-representation of Asians in tech overall, vs. under-representation of Asians in progression of tech leadership. Both can be true simultaneously. Accepting the precondition that Asians are over-represented compared to the general population, their progression to leadership roles (from both tech and non-tech origins) suggests under-representation. i.e., based on the precondition we'd expect to see more Asian leaders in these companies. That the precondition exists is a fairly interesting problem itself, but largely separate from the argument of leadership. At the heart of it is the notion of equality - that two equal candidates get a fair shake at a promotion/role regardless of race. Regardless of whether or not leadership positions bias towards tech candidates or non-tech candidates, the gap exists - Asians are promoted/hired into leadership positions at a lower rate than their participation in the rest of the industry. This is particularly visible in professions where the advancement track is less vague and more straightforward - for example in law Asian-Americans represent 6.7% of associates, but only 1.8% of sr. counsel, and 1.7% of partners. This sort of gets at the original problem I brought up - that Asians have a problem, and are a problem. The over-representation of Asians in white collar professions is used as a bludgeon with which to attack other minorities, and used to invalidate real inequities within these professions such as whether or not they're being treated fairly when it comes to promotions and advancement. The Model Minority myth is damaging all around - to other races, to Asians themselves.
- jacalata 12y ago
  You shouldn't be comparing the percentage of Asians in leadership positions to the overall percentage of Asians in the country, but to the demographics of the companies as a whole. By that comparison, Asians aren't overrepresented in Google's leadership team - checking out their own diversity stats, 30% of the company is Asian but only 23% of their leadership team. (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html#tab=leadership http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html#tab=leadershi...) This article contains numbers for a lot of companies: http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/In-tech-even-Asians-are-left-out-at-the-top-5709457.php http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/In-tech-even-Asians...
  - morgante 12y ago
    > You shouldn't be comparing the percentage of Asians in leadership positions to the overall percentage of Asians in the country, but to the demographics of the companies as a whole. Why? It's only in the context of the rest of the country that complaints about the underrepresentation of other minorities makes sense.
    - jacalata 12y ago
      Not really. Imagine a company where 99% of hires had graduated from Stanford and 1% from Harvard, but only 1% of people promoted to management were Stanford grads. You wouldn't say "well, the percentage of Stanford graduates in the country is statistically insignificant so it makes sense for there to be very few Stanford grads in management".
      - morgante 12y ago
        This assumes that the standard path into leadership positions is via promotion from the tech department. I think that's a pretty dubious assumption.

yummyfajitas 12y ago

We're "represented" in tech, but not at the upper echelons where we're substantially under represented... Do you have data on this? Anecdotally it isn't hard to think of Asians in the upper echelons (e.g. Satya Nadella). A quick glance at google's management team finds Asians to be overrepresented at 4/18 Asians (6/18 if you include middle easterners). http://www.google.com/about/company/facts/management/ http://www.google.com/about/company/facts/management/ Microsoft (2/16) and Twitter (2/14) seem similar: http://news.microsoft.com/microsoft-senior-leaders/ http://news.microsoft.com/microsoft-senior-leaders/ https://about.twitter.com/company/leadership https://about.twitter.com/company/leadership (0.8/16 is what would be expected based on proportional representation.)

potatolicious 12y ago
> "Do you have data on this? Anecdotally it isn't hard to think of Asians in the upper echelons (e.g. Satya Nadella)." In the same way Barack Obama is evidence that black people have it pretty easy around here ;) There are definitely some high-profile Asians in tech, they're not exactly rare like unicorns, but the underrepresentation is plenty real. I dug up the original article I was reading: http://the-toast.net/2014/10/23/asian-americans-media/view-all/?utm_content=buffere0bba&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer http://the-toast.net/2014/10/23/asian-americans-media/view-a... - btw, this is IMO the most approachable/parseable summary of where Asian-Americans fit into the greater American race relations landscape I've seen yet. It's well worth a read. It's a more general look at Asian-Americans, but there is a section specifically addressing tech. More concretely giving numbers to the representation deficit: http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23100254/glass-ceiling-asian-americans-still-under-represented-silicon http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23100254/glass-ceiling-asian-a... Even in Google's own numbers Asians represent 34% of the tech workforce and 23% in leadership roles. Facebook's a bit worse - 41% of tech workforce Asian, 19% leadership. Yahoo is particularly egregious - 57% Asian, 17% leadership. Even Twitter isn't particularly great: 34% Asians in tech, 24% in leadership from their own report: https://blog.twitter.com/2014/building-a-twitter-we-can-be-proud-of https://blog.twitter.com/2014/building-a-twitter-we-can-be-p...
- yummyfajitas 12y ago
  By those numbers, Asians are overrepresented in both tech and leadership. The real question is why they aren't more overrepresented in leadership. It's a valid question, but a different one than I was asking. Apriori I would not expect the demographics of leadership to look like those of tech. My simple model (with allusions to michaelochurch) is that tech is generally not the path to leadership. I.e., if 3% of techies go into leadership vs 5% of non-techies, then leadership demographics will look more like non-tech demographics than tech demographics.
  - potatolicious 12y ago
    The under representation exists even if we include all Asians employed at these companies - Twitter has for example a 29%/24% difference, Facebook is 24/19 when restricted to just non-tech role headcount. Yahoo comes in at 24/17 when similarly looking at just non-tech employees. The demographics of leadership actually get worse once you leave tech: Asians represent 0.8% of C-level roles, and 2.1% of board seats - against 5% in the general population. Tech is actually a relative bright spot when it comes to Asians in leadership roles. > "The real question is why they aren't more overrepresented in leadership." This really isn't the question at all. You're conflating two separate problems: over-representation of Asians in tech overall, vs. under-representation of Asians in progression of tech leadership. Both can be true simultaneously. Accepting the precondition that Asians are over-represented compared to the general population, their progression to leadership roles (from both tech and non-tech origins) suggests under-representation. i.e., based on the precondition we'd expect to see more Asian leaders in these companies. That the precondition exists is a fairly interesting problem itself, but largely separate from the argument of leadership. At the heart of it is the notion of equality - that two equal candidates get a fair shake at a promotion/role regardless of race. Regardless of whether or not leadership positions bias towards tech candidates or non-tech candidates, the gap exists - Asians are promoted/hired into leadership positions at a lower rate than their participation in the rest of the industry. This is particularly visible in professions where the advancement track is less vague and more straightforward - for example in law Asian-Americans represent 6.7% of associates, but only 1.8% of sr. counsel, and 1.7% of partners. This sort of gets at the original problem I brought up - that Asians have a problem, and are a problem. The over-representation of Asians in white collar professions is used as a bludgeon with which to attack other minorities, and used to invalidate real inequities within these professions such as whether or not they're being treated fairly when it comes to promotions and advancement. The Model Minority myth is damaging all around - to other races, to Asians themselves.
jacalata 12y ago
You shouldn't be comparing the percentage of Asians in leadership positions to the overall percentage of Asians in the country, but to the demographics of the companies as a whole. By that comparison, Asians aren't overrepresented in Google's leadership team - checking out their own diversity stats, 30% of the company is Asian but only 23% of their leadership team. (http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html#tab=leadership http://www.google.com/diversity/at-google.html#tab=leadershi...) This article contains numbers for a lot of companies: http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/In-tech-even-Asians-are-left-out-at-the-top-5709457.php http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/In-tech-even-Asians...
- morgante 12y ago
  > You shouldn't be comparing the percentage of Asians in leadership positions to the overall percentage of Asians in the country, but to the demographics of the companies as a whole. Why? It's only in the context of the rest of the country that complaints about the underrepresentation of other minorities makes sense.
  - jacalata 12y ago
    Not really. Imagine a company where 99% of hires had graduated from Stanford and 1% from Harvard, but only 1% of people promoted to management were Stanford grads. You wouldn't say "well, the percentage of Stanford graduates in the country is statistically insignificant so it makes sense for there to be very few Stanford grads in management".
    - morgante 12y ago
      This assumes that the standard path into leadership positions is via promotion from the tech department. I think that's a pretty dubious assumption.