Non-binary queer woman here. I can usually get a vibe at interviews about the company culture, from the people I talk to (my questions and their general personalities). The only team I've ever felt "normal" at was one where one of the interviewers was gay. My boss there had hired a bunch of really talented queer developers from his network, so half the team was queer. I guess I really liked the personalities of the p…
Aren't you essentially making the argument that you are most comfortable working with people similar to yourself? Which is not a criticism. It's completely understandable. But how, then, do we get all of us (you, me, etc...) to feel comfortable working together, despite any particular differences? (I don't have any easy answers, and I may not even be someone whose opinion means much on this subject. I honestly got so…
Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
361–370 of 512 posts
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
You aren't outright wrong, the problem is that if you are a woman (or black or fill in the blank) and you have been consistently shit all over your entire life because of it, not only do you suffer from burn out on trying to keep your chin up and hope for the best and all that, but you may have zero skills for trying to effectively interact with people in a way that doesn't help recreate the same shitty experiences.…
I actually like the parable because it hints at another side to the issue, which is the perceiver, and though I'm not a woman I do get to sit in one type of disadvantaged social role in life, so I can relate. And I've given this some thought. First off, while it's true that social factors are real, provable with data, and very annoyingly denied by many out there, the degree to which we tie our personal identity to a…
If you really dig into the details, the odds are good that the differences in their perception is rooted in more concrete and complicated problems than merely perceiving the problem differently. There are quite a lot of seemingly or even literally invisible issues that have substantial impact on social outcomes.
My oldest son walks around with a social black cloud over his head. People read him as defiant of authority and disrespectful merely for opening his mouth. They read me as ass kissingly deferential. We have done quite a lot of research and concluded that he lacks prosody -- he has no ability to tone match, so he gets that reaction of "I don't like your tone." I apparently tone match by default, which gets me read as very submissive and subservient, but the reality is that I do it in part because I am routinely perceived to be a dragon lady, so if I don't go the extra mile to try to be mollifying and build bridges, it is a shit show every step of the way.
I didn't say I dislike the parable. But as someone who does study the social stuff a helluva lot, I can tell you that there are going to be massively more differences between the "positive" traveler and the "negative" one than merely their attitude. I have substantial social astuteness which makes its vastly less dangerous for me to try to navigate situations that many women want no part of. It would be monstrously assholish of me to dismiss their very real problems in life just because "Well, it works fine for me!"
My son will never be able to glad-hand the way I do. He outright lacks the ability to tone match. Saying the exact same words as me to the exact same people in the exact same situation gets very different reactions. I know because I have seen exactly that happen.
The world if full of fascinating invisible forces, including pheromones, verbal cues and a million other details. Pretending that this parable is merely about having a good attitude is a gross oversimplification.
Tell the story again and say that one of the travelers is black and the other white or one is male and the other female or one is rich and the other poor and see how you feel then about acting like your attitude alone determines your social outcomes.
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#363If you can't stand the environment this creates then it seems like trying to find a remote job would be ideal. That way, aside from the occasional off-topic meeting, work is work.
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#364Look for teams that have a broad range of ages and experiences. These people foster learning and accept they individually don't know everything.
Stay away from mono cultures.
Managers that are involved parents having ongoing experience raising children are great. People without children haven't been forced to learn patience and compassion...day in day out being a responsible parent is like a good manager.
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bullshit. nobody wanted open floor plans, or if they did, they had immediate buyers remorse. Open floor plans became a fad that turned into a way for cheap ass companies to slash costs and brag about it on linkedin about how trendy they were being.
I can prove you wrong. I want and like open floor plans, and have never had buyer's remorse. I'll rule out any cube farm for any future job; I hate the isolation.
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can prove you wrong. I want and like open floor plans, and have never had buyer's remorse. I'll rule out any cube farm for any future job; I hate the isolation.
Oh man, finally we found the responsible person for open office misery :)
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#367I look for existing diversity, and of underrepresented minorities not just gender diversity (IME this is often a better signal.) Especially in upper levels: the % of Software Engineer 1s matters a lot less than the % of architects and tech leads. Second (and I kind of hate to give this one away), I ask "what do you sacrifice when recruiting to ensure diversity?" The answer should be either "it takes us longer to recr…
"Second (and I kind of hate to give this one away), I ask 'what do you sacrifice when recruiting to ensure diversity?'" I find it disturbing that you think hiring diversity entails a sacrifice.
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#368It's hard to find an academic-type culture without big egos and ignorance. Look for teams that have a broad range of ages and experiences. These people foster learning and accept they individually don't know everything. Stay away from mono cultures. Managers that are involved parents having ongoing experience raising children are great. People without children haven't been forced to learn patience and compassion...da…
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#369Woman in high pressure tech here. First, the most important person is your direct manager. Ask recruiters specifically "did I meet with the person I'd be reporting to? If not I would like to meet them." This is the most key person, and if they are not your ally, no matter what the rest of the company thinks, you are sunk. Ask about other women at the company, or if the team has had women but they've left. If they thi…
Re: Ask HN: Women in tech, how do you find non-toxic work environments?
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely. In my experience, "bro culture" is simply a sign of an immature corporate culture that hasn't figured out how to address true diversity. It means that the workplace is not likely to be supportive of people who don't fit a mold (ping pong and beer are not things I care about). They'll pay some lip service to diversity, and they'll point to some gay guy who is exactly like everyone else (except he dates guy…
I'm not sure if we ever manage to escape the equivalent of high school cliques. Even the the culture of professionalism is still a culture: it places emphasis on professional interactions at work and looks down on playing beer pong on wednesday afternoon. The bros aren't going to have the freedom to "be themselves" there, and would probably be happier at a more lax company. Again, going back to their own clique.
As for happiness in lax company: it might make people happier if they get money and promotions while actually working less (while moving socialization and fun from home to office), but it is neither meritocracy nor fair. Regardless of whether they are bros or chatting over coffee.