Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai • Hacker News Board

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#421

Post by pas » Thu, Aug 10, 2017, 4:48 PM UTC

throwaway12124 wrote: post #386

pas wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not "now". People were doing this in these recent years. And it's sort of ... makes sense. You should be allowed to augment your mind with fucking spreadsheets/lists. It's different if a government/company does it.

It's not the augmentation method that's the problem. It's the apparent fact that managers/etc at Google are apparently building secret lists of people they won't work with because of ideological reasons. That's both morally awful and quite insubordinate. What should they be doing instead? (1) STFU. (2) Do their jobs. It's called being professional.

They are noting who they would rather not work with.

That means when they can pick new people for their team(s), they try to pick from those who are not on their shit list.

But if their supervisor tells them to work with X, who happens to be on a no-no list, they won't start a hissy fit. (They might try to influence their higher up to reconsider.)

And in big corps like google it's not too surprising that people with very different worldviews try to stay away from each other.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#422

Post by throwaway12124 » Thu, Aug 10, 2017, 5:54 PM UTC

pas wrote: post #421

throwaway12124 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the augmentation method that's the problem. It's the apparent fact that managers/etc at Google are apparently building secret lists of people they won't work with because of ideological reasons. That's both morally awful and quite insubordinate. What should they be doing instead? (1) STFU. (2) Do their jobs. It's called being professional.

They are noting who they would rather not work with. That means when they can pick new people for their team(s), they try to pick from those who are not on their shit list. But if their supervisor tells them to work with X, who happens to be on a no-no list, they won't start a hissy fit. (They might try to influence their higher up to reconsider.) And in big corps like google it's not too surprising that people with…

"they won't start a hissy fit"?

That's not what their comments (in the leaked screenshots) would seem to indicate. On the contrary, they seem ready to go to great lengths, lengths harmful to their employer, to carry out their stated personal policies.

At virtually any ordinary company, they'd be fired for this.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#423

Post by gurkendoktor » Thu, Aug 10, 2017, 7:06 PM UTC

bostik wrote: post #402

gurkendoktor wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of a study that is focused on (software) engineers? The McKinsey study looks at companies' top management for its diversity metrics, but I don't really trust studies across professions. Most anecdotes I've read about the benefits of diversity boil down to "if only we'd had a on the team, we would have noticed ". But as a developer, my requirements are set by project managers (50% women in my experience)…

> Are you aware of a study that is focused on (software) engineers? Sadly no :( - I'm fully aware that the studies in this field mostly focus on financial outcomes, and because they are commissioned by consulting/recruiting agencies, they are of course targeting the management group. That's one of the reasons I would love to see the numbers from Google's internal research. As for this: > Most anecdotes I've read abou…

> From the tone you used, it feels like you have witnessed something more akin box-ticking than strategy, cargo-culting over rationality.

I guess my summary sounded a little harsh. Here's a typical example[1]:

>> When the employees of an organization better represent their users and desired users, they will build more effectively for those groups. When YouTube’s almost entirely right-handed developer team built the iOS app without considering how left-handed people would use it, for example, 5% to 10% of videos were uploaded upside down as a result. This factor may be especially relevant for leaders of consumer tech companies.

I have heard of/read similar anecdotes about various groups of people that certainly have different perspectives, but it always seems extremely anecdotal to me.

This study sounds more promising in my opinion[2]:

>> When a black person presented a dissenting perspective to a group of whites, the perspective was perceived as more novel and led to broader thinking and consideration of alternatives than when a white person introduced that same dissenting perspective. The lesson: when we hear dissent from someone who is different from us, it provokes more thought than when it comes from someone who looks like us.

> That is an interesting observation.

I've tried to verify that my experience wasn't a complete outlier; it seems that PMs really have a more balanced gender ratio than engineers: https://www.knowledgetrain.co.uk/resources/careers/women-in-...

> Also: if PM roles can have a 50/50 gender split, does that mean that women are more likely to seek promotions that lead to PM type positions?

...but now I realise that we must work for very different companies/clients. I don't see project management as a promotion from engineering - in my experience, it's a completely separate career path, just like design. Also, since I am a freelancer, my clients' offices are often full of other freelancers, and promotions aren't really a thing.

[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2015/07/21/why... [2] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-diversity-mak...