Improving Diversity in Tech
Diversity: the subject of social media flamewars and Republican talking points. Great for getting clicks. Not so great for people trying to make a living without worrying about being judged on their culture or skin color. Maybe this isn't timely content with major corporations rolling back their DEI programs and co-towing to right-wing loudmouths. They ran the numbers and marginalized people aren't profitable. Surely the marginalization has nothing to do with the lack of profit.[1]
This attitude doesn't sit well with me. Beyond the obvious needs for equality, in the long term it's bad for business. Diverse staff reaches diverse customers. It ensures a wider net for your product and it ensures you're speaking everyone's language. A diverse staff helps you see problems that wouldn't affect you personally but could make your product unsafe for someone who doesn't look like you.
"But cfreak! The only thing that matters in the next quarter!"
Maybe I'm alone in my crusade but I believe in corporations that do more than bare minimum for the bottom line. We'll agree to disagree.
So what can be done? Unfortunately too many organizations follow the strategy to "treat everyone equally and hope it goes away". The reality is as humans we gravitate toward the familiar. If a team is all white dudes then it tends to hire all white dudes. This is shown in the stats: white men are far over-represented in the industry and there are widespread problems with harassment[3].
It's not just assholes that have biases. Everyone has biases, even unconscious ones. A recent study showed that hiring managers were quicker to pass over Black sounding names while proceeding with white ones. I'm certain every one of those managers would say they were treating everyone equally but the reality is unconscious bias is coloring their decisions.
There is no magic bullet to make tech more inclusive. Everyone needs to play a role. Universities and bootcamps need to recruit more under represented groups and provide them support. Recruiters need to look in non-traditional places for candidates. Companies need to really rethink how recruiting is done and stop providing recruiter incentive for "butts in seats" over quality candidates. Companies also need to fire toxic people.
Here are some things that I've done on my team that have helped:
- Changing my metrics. Other than skills, which are pretty easy to test for, companies are looking for team fit. One such metric was "confidence". The problem is that society encourages both women and minorities to tone down their confidence lest they be seen as "uppity". I've met a lot of bad developers who exhibited confidence (and yeah, they're mostly dudes). It's also about identifying a person's strengths rather than just going in with a checklist.
- Looking in less traditional places for people. Meet-Up groups for women/minority developers, boot camps, or even community colleges. People who are changing careers into software development (older than your typical college grad) have helped because you find a lot more diversity there.
- Ensuring that we're paying the same for the same job. This one is harder because ownership demands that I pay the lowest someone will accept. Marginalized people often don't negotiate and ask for less overall. When I've wanted to hire someone I often will encourage them to ask for more if I think they are lowballing themselves. (In the end that makes my job easier when raises come around after a year)
- And after that sometimes the thumb goes on the scale. My interview rate for diverse candidates is decent but I still see 3 - 4 men for every woman that apply. All else being equal I'll often choose the most diverse candidate.
I've expressed these opinions on public forums before to the predictable backlash.[2]
Then came the hiring for 5 more developers and even though we were open to all genders. I was a part of the hiring team and We disregarded several amazing male candidates.
Resumes[3] describe a person's experience and they tell you nothing about skill. If you have someone in an under-represented group they will have less experience by default because they've obtained less through privilege alone. Instead of looking at it as "a male candidate didn't get a job" look at it as "a female candidate is getting a chance she wouldn't otherwise have". The male candidate is going to get more chances.
Finding good female candidates were extremely hard eventually we did find some but they were such in high demand its difficult to convince them to join our company because we are still pretty new.
The first part is a recruiting problem. Look in more non-traditional places and demand more from your recruiters. The second part is a "you" problem. Yes, good developers cost a lot of money. Sweeten the deal, and provide more pay and benefits. Welcome to capitalism. The male candidate should have done more negotiation.[4]
To me this is forced and it may cause even more gender discrimination.
"We can't fix discrimination because the people who perpetrate it will be upset" is a terrible reason to do nothing.
You may think its okay to hire people who are not the best but they are qualified females, please state your arguments so that I can discuss with you.
In conclusion, it's a low bar to be better than the person who posted that one.