Live data from Hacker News

We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

blog.interviewing.io

331–340 of 668 posts

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#331
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author is leaving unstated what we all know to be true: most of these jobs aren't really that hard. You don't really need the people with pedigreed CS backgrounds, but it's easier than actually figuring out how to screen candidates. The "pipeline problem" is the pipeline itself. So you have to go around the pipeline by avoiding the formal education system, which is where the bias is observed.

That's not quite right either, because if these were truly easy jobs someone would have figured that out and won by hiring cheap developers with non-traditional backgrounds. In fact engineering jobs are hard, and there is a big spread in candidate quality. The issue is that heretofore the best proxy for candidate quality is educational background, hence the pipeline problem. And you definitely fix that by going aroun…

> because if these were truly easy jobs someone would have figured that out and won by hiring cheap developers with non-traditional backgrounds.

This is literally what is happening at many companies, quite often. I know so many female developers who have, in the past, said things like "Oh, I'd never work at Uber". And because of this, Uber has to pay their engineers a lot more money, because they can't attract any female employees.

Skiping on diversity initiatives is not just immoral, it is dumb. And you will lose money because of it.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#332

I don't think the point of criticizing "it's a pipeline problem" is that there isn't a pipeline problem, but that it's an easy out to avoid taking action at whatever stage of the 'pipeline' you happen to be working at. If, as an manager at a FAANG, you say "it's a pipeline problem" you're probably saying that there aren't enough candidates because not enough women graduate from ST programs. If you're a program develo…

Or to play with the metaphor, it may be a pipeline problem but there's also the phenomenon of "back pressure", where cause-and-effect move in both directions.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you cannot expect to make things better than they are at the input of your pipe segment Not in the short-run. But the reason working on the pipeline is valuable is that discrimination includes negative feedback loops. When people who would be entering the pipeline look for role models and success stories and don't find any, they're discouraged from trying. So while there are of course diminishing returns in investi…

I'm sure I'll be downvoted for merely asking, but I'm genuinely curious: what is the evidence for discrimination? Is it simply the null hypothesis (gap, ergo discrimination) or are there studies or something that actually highlight discrimination, and if the latter, how much of the gap is explained by discrimination? Last I asked this question, I was referred to the orchestra blind audition study (Goldin et al), but…

> Is it simply the null hypothesis (gap, ergo discrimination)

As far as I've ever seen, this plus occasional anecdotes, no actual data.

> Last I asked this question, I was referred to the orchestra blind audition study (Goldin et al), but I'm pretty sure that was data from 1950s-80s, from a different industry, and didn't actually demonstrate a significant effect when accounting for large error margins.

Forget the large error margins, it didn't have the effect everyone "knows" it had [0]. It even benefited the men instead of the women at certain points.

[0] https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2019/05/11/did-blind-...

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you might be reading into what I wrote a bit. This is just how I feel...not how I WANT to feel. Obviously, these are biases and anxieties that exist in my own mixed-race low-income immigrant brain that i wish weren't there. As another latino founder told me..."walk into a VC pitch meeting with the confidence of a tall white man." Like I don't hate caucasians but sometimes can't help but notice these differenc…

As a tall while Caucasian I think you need you have a problem with the environment, not a racial one. I live in Eastern Europe and we don't really know what racism is because we have no history of problems in the past; I had direct reports that were Latino and Latina, Europeans (Caucasians), black (African): they were friends more than subordinates. In Bucharest my South African colleague, the Brazilian one and the C…

Unfortunately, Wikipedia finds your experience to not be universal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Europe . I hope this continues to change, however!

More relevantly, it is useful to understand the VC process as selling to a mix of individuals. The horrible ones stink and need to be written off. It sucks, but that's life. (You probably don't want to work with them anyway: should you really trust them with your life's work through all the closed door activities that happen?) At the same time, there is a strong wave of individuals and firms that view non-traditional backgrounds as a valuable leading indicator for key difficult aspects of company building. Fundraising is a form of sales. You only really need one yes, so having access to otherwise closed off sources of capital is an amazing advantage.

It's a weird world and something I care about, so I'm genuine in my offer to folks here.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much this. I work at a FAANG company which has terrible diversity numbers in hardware development. Upper management is frequently asked about this by employees at big q&a sessions. The answer is always to blame the pipeline, as if we do not have billions of dollars that we could direct at solving it ourselves...

Except it isn't their responsibility. Clearly they don't have trouble making profit so why would they spend billions of dollars trying to urge people who may or may not even want the job to try and do it?

Billions are being spent on housing in the bay area by these ultra rich companies even though it is arguably not at all their responsibility.

Except it is, because of course it is.

Who is responsible for fixing the gender imbalance in tech, if not the leaders in tech?

(Of course the housing thing may just be a cynical calculation that it’s cheaper than the toxic public relations of doing nothing. But maybe that should be the case for the gender thing too.)

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of the article is that restricting your hiring pool to only CS graduates is a bad pattern and you should consider other qualities instead so saying only 18% of CS graduates are female misses the point. Having no CS degree myself and excelling in a top 10 company I agree with this sentiment, especially seeing the epidemic of “over leveling” the small pool of CS graduates occurring. I’d rather work with…

I’m a drop out too and have made my way to manager where I find myself training juniors many of which also do not have degrees. Unfortunately it is night and day between the ones who do have degrees and those that don’t. At this point I am now strongly recommending cs degrees to anyone seeking a career in programming because the theories do come up in any serious work, particularly full stack engineers who must have…

> theories do come up in any serious work

Depends on what you classify as serious work, I guess?

From years of reading similar comments and my own experience, I was under the impression most “software developer” jobs only lightly touch on anything complex - most of us aren’t designing databases and complex low-level stuff day-to-day, but we do need to know enough to not do something terribly inefficient and stupid in basic plumbing code.

I think what you really need are smart people, and people who are willing to put in the work to get past the first few years of stumbling and not knowing what anything means. Likewise, young developers need good mentors and patient senior developers to lean on and who they can pick this stuff up from.

Not sure what your company is doing, but if what you say is true, maybe you are one of the rarer groups actually doing the hard stuff.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#337
post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that it's only a matter of time until Asian women are treated the same way as Asian men. Once you've managed to close the gender gap in engineering, you have a new problem to deal with -- a lack of diversity among women engineers in regards to race and socio-economic class. The blanket catch-all term "Asian" is not doing this conversation any favors. You assert a monoculture, but Asia is a huge region with…

The terminology used by modern institutions is vague for a reason. Being too specific is excessively and indefensibly discriminatory.

I am not sure I grok your reasoning. How is being specific 'excessively and indefensibly discrimintory'? Honest question, your words are strong.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#338
post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The concept that men and women may have different interests is considered sexist I would posit that men and women have different realities, thus different needs. This shapes interests. It's not wholly unassailable, but needs to be approached differently than goals like "achieve x percentage of women in tech" are typically approached.

How many aspects of the differing realities are due to inherent biological differences, and how many are due to societal environment, though?

I think enough are due to societal environment that this is something we can work on, but not by arbitrarily saying things like "We want to hire more women in tech."

I posted something of a "case study" in this discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21695925

It's currently downvoted and has one not very nice reply. I guess it's far less of a shit show than it really "should" be, but this is kind of par for the course. People want to believe that sexism is some nebulous problem "out there" and it's not anything they, personally, are doing and if you try to point out what can be done differently in the here and now, well, people are offended and use that to justify doubling down on mistreating people who are already suffering from social exclusion based on gender, skin color, whatever.

I've had college classes in things like Social Psychology and Negotiation and Conflict Management. I'm a woman and I was one of the top three students of my graduating high school class and then I spent about two decades doing the full-time homemaker thing and wondering where the hell my life went wrong that I didn't get the two-career couple modern American dream that I had expected.

So I know a lot about the space. I've read a lot of books on women's issues and I spent a lot of time in therapy and so forth, but most people don't really want to hear what I have to say. It makes them uncomfortable.

Some points I have been trying to make on HN for years:

1. Most men will not genuinely engage me in a substantive and positive way that leads to some kind of professional development or professional opportunity. They either argue with me or they hit on me. Neither fosters the kind of professional connections I need.

Among other things, I need people to talk with me in earnest about my work. I need people to promote my work, which historically has just not been done. Only recently has anyone other than me apparently posted any of my writing to HN that wasn't basically mud slinging and gossip.

And I think I can't get that primarily because men basically are nice to women when they are looking for sex and that's pretty much it. And they actively avoid being too nice to any woman they aren't trying to sleep with for fear of it having some kind of negative outcome, such as an unintended affair or career-damaging gossip.

2. I need income and no one really wants to hear that. I was a homemaker for years and the things I'm good at combined with my gender cause people to feel that I am supposed to do nice things for them out of the goodness of my heart because I care like I'm their mother. I have a pretty good idea where that pattern comes from, but it's a broken mental model that harms the incomes and lives of a great many women. This shitty expectation that I should benefit others for free out of the goodness of my heart was hung on me even when I was literally homeless.

-----

Decades of trying to sort out my own problems and reading up on what happens with other women has me convinced that the lack of ability to seriously connect with men socially in a professional way is a huge barrier to professional development. I'm convinced that a lot of female-led startups fail because they don't get those small nudges about what needs to happen with the business or code base that men get from having a beer with buddies or whatever and discussing it casually. So pivots happen much later and involve much larger changes and it's deadly to a lot of businesses.

I've been on HN for over a decade. Only in recent weeks do I have contacts via HN with men who will talk with me via email about something other than personal bullshit. I've been exchanging emails with two different men met through HN about housing issues.

Two contacts is something I should have been able to come up with in the first year, not more than a decade later. Everyone else has basically either emailed me to bond personally while doing not a fucking thing to further my professional goals, was actively trying to victimize me because they were shitty people, or they were hitting on me or they were writing me basically out of pity as their good deed for the day and not because they really had anything meaningful to discuss with me in earnest.

I feel I've been endlessly patient with a truly appalling situation and it hardly budges and if I get frustrated and upset because I'm still dirt poor and still can't make my life work and my gender is a very large factor there, then I get amazingly shitty feedback like it's somehow my fault for being rude or something. So basically no matter how virtuous I am, it's never enough and there is always some shitty BS excuse to blame me for it.

This boils down to "People don't really want it to change." It doesn't directly negatively impact the men here that they are aware of, so not their problem that there is a woman in their midst who routinely can't afford enough food to eat every day.

I'm quite fed up and if I had some means to go postal and murder a bunch of people that in my mind are "at fault," I probably would at this point. I just have no means to somehow blow up HN and multiple people met through HN.

I no longer know what to do. Being patient, diplomatic, articulate, long-suffering and blah blah blah isn't solving it. At the rate I'm going, I might have a middle class income in another hundred years, assuming I live that long and it's mind boggling to me that people who routinely claim they are interested in addressing issues like sexism are amazingly content to continue to basically step over my body in the gutter and mutter to themselves "Not my problem."

So the world isn't likely to change because the world doesn't actually want to change. It would rather look for excuses and justifications than viable solutions.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#339
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure this constitutes illegal discrimination under US law?

What does? Australia BTW.

Not sure what GP meant, but I'd guess promotions are much more susceptible to discrimination cases than hires, since there's something much more concrete to compare against.

If you hire only one gender with narrowly targetted job advertisements, the"wronged party is a pool of thousands (or more) of engineers that didn't even know the job existed. If you promote only one gender from the mail room, the wronged party is a small cohort of peers that can visibly see exactly who is promoted above them. Those are much more dangerous waters to tread.

Re: We ran the numbers, and there really is a pipeline problem in engineering hiring

#340
post #274
post #222

I'm going to preface this post by saying that I don't have a problem with most of my coworkers (male and female) being Asian. In fact, I prefer it. I'm not Asian, but the majority of my friends, classmates, and coworkers throughout my life have been, and that continues even now during my career in tech. Whenever I see anything related to affirmative action being discussed nowadays, I think that it's only a matter of…

> most companies, who are expending great effort on balancing the gender ratio while treating men of color as second-class URMs At least in the US actually admitting to having gender biased hiring would have to violate a half dozen anti-discrimination labor protection laws, no? Universities are doing affirmative action because there is no legislation mandating they not be sexist in their enrollment whereas corporatio…

The reverse is true.

Affirmative Action is requirer by law: "The order specifically requires certain organizations accepting federal funds to take affirmative action to increase employment of members of preferred racial or ethnic groups and women... quotas based on an analysis of the current workforce compared to the availability in the general labor pool of women and members of racial minorities. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_Unit...

Post reply on HN