| ▲ | tdb7893 4 hours ago |
| Places I've worked that actually seem to have inclusion as a core value are great places to work and seem to have high functioning teams. My impression mostly though is more that it was never really a value for management but they wasted a bunch of time talking about it. In general any mismatch between stated values and actual values has been awful to deal with and is a red flag for places to work. |
|
| ▲ | groby_b 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| That's the thing - you can have it as a lived value, or you can have HR run programs. Very few places have/had both. Given the choice, I'd pick door #1. (Saying this as a strong advocate for diversity and inclusion, lest there's confusion) |
| |
| ▲ | browningstreet 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Lived values need to be discussed sometimes… | | | |
| ▲ | makeitdouble 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | HR run programs are costly and applied to either mandated trainings or things the org has issues with. DEI isn't mandatory, so an org heavily invested in DEI training probably had serious issues in the first place (whether they end up on the other side at the end of the trainings being another question) That's different from putting it as a core value though. Most companies have some kind of "make more money with less resources" stated value, and I don't think we see it as an issue ? |
|
|
| ▲ | madamelic 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Places I've worked that actually seem to have inclusion as a core value I am not sure if you had implied it but that would align with my experience as well: places that tout diversity were the worst places to work (as someone who is seen as 'diverse') while the ones that treated everyone the same and had the expectation everyone pulls their weight. I absolutely despise people treating me differently because of who / what I am rather than doing good work. I will take mildly inappropriate good-nature jokes over head pats every day of the week. |
| |
| ▲ | mathgladiator 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I love wildly beyond mild inappropriate jokes as they are a litmus test for a thinking person. The people that take things way too sensitive are a net drag and buzz kill for doing the grinding required. It goes both ways too. I love it when people are agressive with me. So, by freedom of association, cliques form and I have no problem with nepotism because the ultimate currency in life is trust. | | |
| ▲ | LastTrain 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > I love it when people are agressive with me. I highly doubt it considering that you can’t even spell it right you incompetent pillar | | | |
| ▲ | itsdesmond 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Embarrassing. | | |
| ▲ | mathgladiator 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I lost shame a long time ago. I am not even sure what reality is. Like, am i a computation within this meat brain? Or is the brain a two way transceiver to the real dimension and this body is just an avatar a mech that im piloting for a few years. It seems like a cosmic joke. And then think about the sheer obsurdity of sex ... yeesh |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | ReptileMan 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| There are two ways to do diversity - the first is to put a brutal skill filter and take everyone that passes it no matter their skin color, body weight, religion or politics. The other is to reduce people to their demographics and push for (in)visible quotas. One of them leads to crappy results. |
| |
| ▲ | tdb7893 an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I just want to be clear that these are not the only two ways to do diversity. Even if you're just focused on hiring (which is a myopic way to view diversity, even at the most simplistic level you need to think about retention) hiring is complicated and I've seen people try a variety of things to get a wider pool of qualified candidates in the pipeline (offering remote work, better paternity/maternity leaves, outreach with local women in engineering groups, etc). This isn't at all my area of expertise and I've seen a lot of things outside of the dichotomy you described. Also, idk why people view quotas as all of "diversity". I've literally never worked at a place that considered this but I see people mention them all the time on the internet. | |
| ▲ | mapontosevenths 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The meritocratic delusion is that you would be in the "have" pile, rather than sitting in the back of the bus with the rest of the "have nots". Of course, its statistically most likely that any individual would belong to the much larger latter group but stats like that only apply to other people, right? Worse, its a zero step thinkers solution. Step zero is a merit based system, step one is for the people with motels on Boardwalk and Park Place to ensure they can never lose again by rigging the system to ignore merit in favor of capital. | | |
| ▲ | anal_reactor 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > any individual I'm not a random variable, I'm a specific human. Predicting future outcomes need to take into account my personal traits. Otherwise you get into absurdities like "statistically speaking, when you join a family reunion, 15% of the people you see there will be Indians, and another 15% Chinese". |
|
|
