What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft • Hacker News Board

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#171

Post by crackercrews » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:41 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #142

crackercrews wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A recent discussion on HN surfaced this fact. It's legal for higher education for now, but hiring is different. I think a lot of people don't realize this. I didn't. I assumed if you could do it for education you could do it for hiring. Apparently not!

Any source? This seems to indicate that minority demographics may be targeted for recruitment, advancement, etc. https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/hiring/affirmativeact At least at my company, I know they have preferences for minorities over similarly qualified candidates. I've heard a department head specifically tell the managers that we need more women in a specific role. Maybe they're just breaking the law though…

This is one longish discussion of the differences between education and hiring. [1] I think there is a carveout for federal contractors, which is what your link refers to. In general, it is not legal in hiring.

1: https://spigglelaw.com/employers-affirmative-action-boost-di...

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#172

Post by Simon_O_Rourke » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:41 PM UTC

systemvoltage wrote: post #54

Decker87 wrote: post #23

At this moment in time I think companies can gain a major hiring advantage by simply hiring the best regardless of race/gender. So many large companies are shooting themselves in the foot distorting incentives and saying "no" to people who are the wrong color/gender.

I think we're going to see a rise of new companies formed, perhaps not from Silicon Valley, that will reject the whole D&I concept and move forward with complete blindness to race, culture, or gender. They will excel, outperform and form a new age of englightenment. I don't think this will happen because I want it to, it will happen because incentives and fundamentals of operations of a company – i.e., just focus on…

It should happen all other factors being equal, but eventually successful companies start to grow and attract the kind of political manager types. Then the turmoil and in fighting starts.

Also, people hiring in their friends and family over others who are distinctly better.

I've been in many roles over the years in very different companies, and these two eventualities always play out. People are flawed, and the companies they create become equally flawed

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#173

Post by winternett » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:42 PM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #93

bergenty wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> This results in some people (mainly white men) feeling like they are being left out when they really weren’t the best fit but in the past may have picked over someone else. There would be merit to this line of thinking, if the diversity initiatives came in the form of anonymizing resumes and interviews (which is easier to do with remote interviews). But that's not the case. More often than not, diversity initiative…

If you think white men have it hard... Try being a black woman.

Your rosy portrayal of white struggle is deeply mis-informed... People struggle because of corporate cost-cutting strategies, not because minority hires are taking jobs from white men in droves.

A lot of the posts in this thread are evoquing memories from Birth of a Nation... geesis.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#174

Post by OrangeMonkey » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:42 PM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #15

logicalmonster wrote: post #2

According to the Microsoft 2021 Annual Diversity And Inclusion report, 34.9% of employees identified as Asian in the US, far exceeding their overall representation in the US population. Why are Asians doing so well? Why can't we replicate this for other groups? And doesn't trying to hire more of other races imply that mathematically speaking, fewer Asians must be hired and promoted to achieve greater equality? Please…

What you're missing is that a company cannot just hire to meet racial quotas which reflect population percentages in order to be free of bias. That's not what bias means. What bias means is that if there are two equally qualified candidates (as in almost exactly, so that it's a coin toss between them), then one from a certain background is consistently chosen. If more applicants are available that happen to be from a…

I think your statement is the issue.

If you have two equally qualified candidates - one anglo saxan male from boston, and one african american female from georgia - at many places, one is going to be consistently chosen.

I agree - that is absolutely bias based on protected characteristics. Do you?

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#175

Post by csmpltn » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:43 PM UTC

forgomonika wrote: post #151

Decker87 wrote: post #23

At this moment in time I think companies can gain a major hiring advantage by simply hiring the best regardless of race/gender. So many large companies are shooting themselves in the foot distorting incentives and saying "no" to people who are the wrong color/gender.

That doesn't work. There are some really amazing people out there that don't fit the typical tech mold of straight cis (white) guy. They don't stick around if they have to navigate a monoculture that doesn't understand that they are constantly throwing out micro-aggressions to people outside of their view of what acceptable behaviour is. Separating your home life from work life only works for so long before you start…

No post body was provided.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#176

Post by tablespoon » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:43 PM UTC

omegaworks wrote: post #125

systemvoltage wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we're going to see a rise of new companies formed, perhaps not from Silicon Valley, that will reject the whole D&I concept and move forward with complete blindness to race, culture, or gender. They will excel, outperform and form a new age of englightenment. I don't think this will happen because I want it to, it will happen because incentives and fundamentals of operations of a company – i.e., just focus on…

>that will reject the whole D&I concept This is already the norm in Silicon Valley. D&I awareness is a brand new thing, and mediocre reactionaries like the author pervade existing leadership structures. Over 50 years ago the US Military recognized that segregation and entrenched racial biases lead to inefficiencies and lack of readiness.[1] In an economy where hiring pipelines for skilled technical people are stretch…

> Over 50 years ago the US Military recognized that segregation and entrenched racial biases lead to inefficiencies and lack of readiness.[1] In an economy where hiring pipelines for skilled technical people are stretched incredibly thin, we need to be taking a hard look at why we're only getting people that look a certain way through our hiring process.

That doesn't follow, at all. For one, you're comparing apples and oranges. The "norm in Silicon Valley" is not to practice explicit racial segregation like the US Army did in 1940. Additionally, D&I may very well be operating at the wrong end of the pipe.

An anecdote: a non-white friend of mine recently quit her job, because she was pressured into hiring an incompetent person who checked a lot of DEI boxes. That person proceeded to drive her crazy with their incompetence until she burned out and quit.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#177

Post by superjan » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:44 PM UTC

I think it is great that microsoft has a diversity policy and is making clear to everyone there that it matters. It is quite ham-handed, but that is kind of the default in corporations of that size. I can imagine the frustration having to deal with such policies, but he apparently did not reach out to get diverse candidates.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#178

Post by thegrimmest » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:45 PM UTC

mikkergp wrote: post #161

thegrimmest wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They mention an increase of from 3% to 5% of membership of senior black leaders. Do I think those senior black leaders earned it? I'm still unclear as to why we're even bothering to ask the question. How many blonde leaders are there vs. brunettes? Are brunettes poorly represented in corporate leadership? Does anyone care ? Why should they.

People should care because big companies are constantly competing on talent and it would be a competitive advantage to leverage a larger talent pool.

Don't we already hire managers explicitly to make decisions like this? Given we've hired them, shouldn't we trust them to make the best decisions for their teams and their objectives? It seems as though the additional bureaucracy introduced by DEI serves only to disempower managers. This is the function of all bureaucracy, to disempower individual decision making.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#179

Post by stonogo » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:45 PM UTC

ifyoubuildit wrote: post #148

stonogo wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your sarcasm would work better if anyone understood what the hell you were trying to refer to. You seem to ascribe "technological and engineering progress" exclusively to teams of young, white, nerdy men in this comment, which is clearly something only an idiot would do, so I presume you are trying to make a different, better point. Feel free to let us know what that might be.

I think op is saying these things: - We've had major progress over the last however many decades. - A lot of the teams responsible for that work were probably made up of young white nerdy males (obviously not all, but young nerdy males probably covers a large portion of them, otherwise why would we even be here talking about DEI initiatives?) - were all of those teams horrible?

No, the OP is taking for granted that "a lot" of the teams responsible for that work were made of young white nerdy males, and provides no justification for this assumption. Especially in a world where, prior to the current computer boom, Western scientific progress has been associated with grizzled elderly people in solitary labs, and technology was the purview of megacorps run by middle-aged managers.

Re: What “diversity and inclusion” means at Microsoft

#180

Post by systemvoltage » Tue, Oct 11, 2022, 6:45 PM UTC

Simon_O_Rourke wrote: post #172

systemvoltage wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we're going to see a rise of new companies formed, perhaps not from Silicon Valley, that will reject the whole D&I concept and move forward with complete blindness to race, culture, or gender. They will excel, outperform and form a new age of englightenment. I don't think this will happen because I want it to, it will happen because incentives and fundamentals of operations of a company – i.e., just focus on…

It should happen all other factors being equal, but eventually successful companies start to grow and attract the kind of political manager types. Then the turmoil and in fighting starts. Also, people hiring in their friends and family over others who are distinctly better. I've been in many roles over the years in very different companies, and these two eventualities always play out. People are flawed, and the compa…

> Also, people hiring in their friends and family over others who are distinctly better.

That mostly has to do with weighing trusted known-contact vs. untrusted stranger. In extreme case, we see this in a traditional family business that has been owned and operated for generations.