I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity • Hacker News Board

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#441

Post by smokeyj » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 12:04 PM UTC

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #406

smokeyj wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here we have a straight white male telling a woman she's wrong about her experience. I don't subscribe to identity politics, but if you do - there's a fishy smell here. Of course the logical thing is to evaluate all ideas for their merit. But that's not what we're doing here.

Can't we address it like "here's a person telling a person they're wrong about the inferences they're making based on their reported experiences" and attack anything substantive rather than getting hung up on the sex of each person? I thought that was what we were trying to do here.

Unfortunately that's not how identity politics works. The whole point is that your sexual anatomy can disqualify you from having an opinion - which really seems to be the crux of this whole debacle. If you're a man who agrees with identity politics then it's because you're intelligent and compassionate. But if you disagree.. Then it's time to check your privilege.

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#442

Post by whyaduck » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 4:19 PM UTC

peoplewindow wrote: post #84

whyaduck wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak for Google, but I work for a large SV company with an aggressive diversity program, and the goal is to hire to match the demographics of the pipeline of qualified candidates, not the population at large.

I'm almost 100% sure that isn't the case. Maybe you're told it is, but Google liked to tell its employees the same thing. If all your firm wanted to do was ensure its employee pool matched the demographic of the qualified worker pool, it wouldn't have to do anything at all except test for competency. Matching demographics then happens naturally. When your company says "the goal is to match the pipeline" yet still has…

I'm familiar with the culture of the company I work for, I see the hires, I'm part of the hiring process, the goals and results are all public - as in available to anyone with an internet connection. All due respect I'm absolutely 100% certain that you're wrong.

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#443

Post by diedyesterday » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 6:12 PM UTC

kurthr wrote: post #168

turc1656 wrote: post #146

" In the name of diversity, when we fill quotas to check boxes, we fuck it up for the genuinely amazing women in tech. " Precisely. This goes directly to the core of the issue and what I had brought up on the thread recently about the Google employee who got fired. Specifically, if companies were truly interested in fairness, the only mandate for the interview process would be to hire the best person, no exceptions.…

I hear you when you say,"the only mandate for the interview process would be to hire the best person, no exceptions". It just sounds like an HR platitude. If you know how to do that, I actually think you have a multi-$B idea! Unless you mean "cultural fit", or "went to the same school I did" as the best person, I'm doubtful you have one though. I've done enough interviewing and worked with enough people to know that…

When you are hiring do you really need to know if your candidate is a man or woman? How about further developing non-face-to-face "blind" (written or mediated?) interview methods where the the hiring decision-maker does not know the gender or race (all he knows is a gender-less detailed operational profile) and only the go-between facilitator who relays the information would know such thing. Part of the process could be handled by an AI with no gender/race in-parameters, etc.

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#444

Post by rak00n » Wed, Aug 16, 2017, 11:12 PM UTC

sitkack wrote: post #378

turc1656 wrote: post #146

" In the name of diversity, when we fill quotas to check boxes, we fuck it up for the genuinely amazing women in tech. " Precisely. This goes directly to the core of the issue and what I had brought up on the thread recently about the Google employee who got fired. Specifically, if companies were truly interested in fairness, the only mandate for the interview process would be to hire the best person, no exceptions.…

Diversity hires in no way mean that less qualified DI candidates are hired over others. There is so much bias in hiring that I can't even see straight. From people giving pref treatment to nation of origin, sex, schools, political affiliation, etc. The easiest, fairest, more productive solution is to post the job where MORE DI candidates will see it. The next one is to craft positions that aren't built entirely out o…

I noticed this problem too. Teams can fail because of lack of empathy and emotional maturity. This is a much harder problem that doesn't have any simple solution.

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#445

Post by candiodari » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 6:28 AM UTC

sitkack wrote: post #377

humanrebar wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only reason not to do blind hiring is if it produces results which are indistinguishable from standard hiring. Or the fact that it's not really possible. Right now, most software engineering jobs are pretty communication heavy. Almost all company cultures contain a non-trivial amount of verbal communication, so with that premise, it's reasonable to have candidates verbally describe technical things or even make…

Double blind. We do it in science, then do it hiring.

Double blind hiring famously does not result in gender balance (and even less in ethnic balance). This is called the funnel problem.

So that wouldn't solve matters.

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#446

Post by candiodari » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 6:29 AM UTC

kurthr wrote: post #168

turc1656 wrote: post #146

" In the name of diversity, when we fill quotas to check boxes, we fuck it up for the genuinely amazing women in tech. " Precisely. This goes directly to the core of the issue and what I had brought up on the thread recently about the Google employee who got fired. Specifically, if companies were truly interested in fairness, the only mandate for the interview process would be to hire the best person, no exceptions.…

I hear you when you say,"the only mandate for the interview process would be to hire the best person, no exceptions". It just sounds like an HR platitude. If you know how to do that, I actually think you have a multi-$B idea! Unless you mean "cultural fit", or "went to the same school I did" as the best person, I'm doubtful you have one though. I've done enough interviewing and worked with enough people to know that…

So because we'll make small mistakes anyway we should

a) switch to outright discrimination in hiring

b) like it

I submit this would not be an improvement.

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#447

Post by candiodari » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 6:42 AM UTC

ryanobjc wrote: post #179

turc1656 wrote: post #146

" In the name of diversity, when we fill quotas to check boxes, we fuck it up for the genuinely amazing women in tech. " Precisely. This goes directly to the core of the issue and what I had brought up on the thread recently about the Google employee who got fired. Specifically, if companies were truly interested in fairness, the only mandate for the interview process would be to hire the best person, no exceptions.…

So, from the context of Google, you are implying that is not what Google does (hires only to the bar). However, that is exactly what Google does. To get hired you have to pass the 5-interview in-person panel. Period. What the original memo author was railing about, incorrectly, is the perception that spending more time widening the recruiting funnel for "diversity candidates" was lowering the bar. That is not true. T…

She pointed out directly what she was doing, as the hiring manager, in order to sway the 5-interview panel and subsequent committee:

She wrote appeals to the committee. Quote:

> to make cases for cross-functional candidates who would be great assets to Google, even though a (typically) male dominated software engineering interview crew did not find these candidates up to snuff.

It worked, too:

> I had a 90+% success rate changing the hiring decision for these candidates.

Given that appeals exist and managers writing support for a particular candidate having such a success rate does mean that (what we all sort-of knew already) Google's hiring process is nowhere near as "clean" as advertised.

I read other places that the initial reaction to the diversity problem consisted of having the committees work without knowing names, ethnicities and/or genders and this actually made the problem worse, not better.

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#448

Post by pbhjpbhj » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 10:17 PM UTC

humanrebar wrote: post #180

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you list some of the "tech genius" characters you have in mind? I don't watch that much TV, but Abby (sp?) from NCIS springs to mind, slightly quirky, but v. intelligent, commanding. The equivalent character in Alias, f.e., was (in early series at least) a one-dimensional dork.

Garcia from Criminal Minds, Chloe from 24 (more antisocial than specifically Hot Topic), Jenna Simmons from Agents of Shield, one of the clones from Orphan Black (IIRC... didn't watch this much). Basically anyone in Big Bang Theory, Bones (herself). They're certainly STEM, but maybe not "tech" depending on what people mean by that. I don't necessarily think the equivalent male characters are treated comparably well,…

What if it's not really great fit "normal" people, if geeks and nerds get on better with it. Doesn't that make it bad to try and convince people to take up STEM jobs, if they won't enjoy then as much as other roles?

I've only worked one job in science, I wouldn't describe the 400 or so people as "normal" as a population: geeky and nerdy, weird a wide variance, but not what I'd expect 999/1000 to be enamoured with.

Perhaps the lack of social skills, and friends, of a good portion of that population (myself included) was an aberration and didn't represent people who prosper in STEM roles in general.

Re: I’m an Ex-Google Woman Tech Leader and I’m Sick of Our Approach to Diversity

#449

Post by danellis » Sun, Aug 27, 2017, 3:59 PM UTC

ScottBurson wrote: post #424

canoebuilder wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

fighting the battle far earlier and getting girls interested young so that they choose to enter these fields at a higher rate than they currently are doing. It's your time and energy if you want to do that, but you should probably recognize you're still treating women differently in that case. Why do you want to pressure or influence people to do something that all the evidence indicates most of them aren't particula…

To counteract pressure and influence that's already present in the other direction, dissuading some people from doing these things even though they would actually enjoy them.

Does it matter if they don't end up doing something they'd enjoy if they end up doing a different thing they enjoy? People talk like writing software is the greatest, most fulfilling job in the world, and if someone misses out on that it's some great detriment to their life.