21–30 of 124 posts
Many of my friends have stopped using Uber in favor of Lyft. Is this a real trend, or just something I see in Silicon Valley tech circles?
Most people who use ridesharing see it only as a cheaper, easier option, which it is.
Tldr: the claim is that when male managers are faced with stack ranking employees, they will often choose male reports over female reports due to sexist bias.
I think a simpler and better claim would be that: When managers are faced with stack ranking employees, they will often decide based on factors not purely related to the productivity or value of the employee. ---- That, and as an employee in a stack-ranked organization, you know you need to be competitive. Not in terms of productivity but in terms of "in the eyes of your manager"-- Perception is more important than p…
[0] https://hbr.org/2017/10/a-study-used-sensors-to-show-that-me...
Many of my friends have stopped using Uber in favor of Lyft. Is this a real trend, or just something I see in Silicon Valley tech circles?
Tldr: the claim is that when male managers are faced with stack ranking employees, they will often choose male reports over female reports due to sexist bias.
I don't know if the article is too long, but "due to sexist bias" is certainly too short to give it justice. The specific problem with stack ranking is the one-on-one ranking method. I'm absolutely convinced that I myself would succumb to all sorts of biases when asked to rate people like that: I'd tend to think the silent, introvert guy who stays late and has no fashion sense is smarter than the outgoing jock leavin…
[0] For some reasonable value of "never"
[1] https://hbr.org/2017/10/a-study-used-sensors-to-show-that-me...
Many of my friends have stopped using Uber in favor of Lyft. Is this a real trend, or just something I see in Silicon Valley tech circles?
I think there is a growing problem in our society, or at least what appears in media, wherein any systematic discrepancy is blamed automatically on some kind of discrimination, without consideration of the possibility for consistent differences in merit between subpopulations.
This is a correction of the previous tendency, which was to take the default assumption that all discrimination was in fact rational and a reflection of consistent differences in merit between sub-populations. We've gone from assuming that discrimination is probably rational to assuming discrimination is probably irrational. You could argue that we've over-corrected, but my own subjective experience leads me to disag…
If you're watching the media then I assume you saw the article today about the bigoted statements that occurred last month at the Air Force academy? Turns out the "victims" were the ones that wrote those messages> Because claiming victimhood status is socially beneficial these days.
Not to say there aren't real problems out there, but we're deep in "boy who cried wolf" territory.
I think there is a growing problem in our society, or at least what appears in media, wherein any systematic discrepancy is blamed automatically on some kind of discrimination, without consideration of the possibility for consistent differences in merit between subpopulations.
Change doesn't happen in a vacuum, and what you describe as "a growing problem in our society" feels like the beginning of a long-overdue good start to many others.
Is it possible to create a performance review system that somebody won't complain is sexist?
Problems like this are endemic to zero-sum schemes like stack ranking.
Is it possible to create a performance review system that somebody won't complain is sexist?
Obviously, yes. Problems like this are endemic to zero-sum schemes like stack ranking.
Edit: The parent post was edited.
Are other employee evaluation schemes free of appearance of sexism (or actual sexism), or is it harder to see?