3 ms·

I think you make a mistake in suggesting a specific number is what is being looked for, or that it's a purely external issue which people are "whining" about.

I think you make a mistake in suggesting a specific number is what is being looked for, or that it's a purely external issue which people are "whining" about. Facebook says it wants more diversity. Research, which Zuckerberg cites in the article, suggests that more diverse teams perform better, so you can consider this a way to improve job performance. That said, African Americans are 12.2% of the U.S. Population. 12.2% of their 2013 hires (1,231) would be ~150 black people. How about that as a goal? Seems reasonable. That wouldn't actually fix the disparity within their company, given the current makeup has less then 1% black people currently, but it would be a significant step toward their stated goal.

dudul 11y ago
150. OK. Now how about 140? Is it still OK? 120? Do we still get an article like this one if it's 120? How about 170? Do we have the opposite problem or is 170 still good diversity? And it's not just for black people. We need the same numbers for women, Latino, native, Asian, transgender, homosexuals, bisexuals, body disabled people, people with mental disease, people from low income family... An of course we need to define each category. When are you black enough? Do you need both your parents to be black or is one enough? How about Asian? Are Indians considered Asians here? At what stage of your transition should you be to be considered transgender? Do you have to transition to be included in the transgender bucket?
- lsiebert 11y ago
  I'm not at all sure what point you are trying to make. I would say working to increase diversity is a lot like firefox, or the linux kernel, or another open source project, where you keep working and making things better, but you never really finish. As you work, you also develop better tools and metrics that more accurately reflect performance. It's a process of improvement, not a solution.

dudul 11y ago

150. OK. Now how about 140? Is it still OK? 120? Do we still get an article like this one if it's 120? How about 170? Do we have the opposite problem or is 170 still good diversity? And it's not just for black people. We need the same numbers for women, Latino, native, Asian, transgender, homosexuals, bisexuals, body disabled people, people with mental disease, people from low income family... An of course we need to define each category. When are you black enough? Do you need both your parents to be black or is one enough? How about Asian? Are Indians considered Asians here? At what stage of your transition should you be to be considered transgender? Do you have to transition to be included in the transgender bucket?

lsiebert 11y ago
I'm not at all sure what point you are trying to make. I would say working to increase diversity is a lot like firefox, or the linux kernel, or another open source project, where you keep working and making things better, but you never really finish. As you work, you also develop better tools and metrics that more accurately reflect performance. It's a process of improvement, not a solution.