Google male engineeer saying female engineers shouldn't be engineers
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I've never seen such a study. Can you point to one? It would depend greatly on how the benefits are designed, though. Also, human factors engineering, especially in software, is no longer really a standalone discipline. It's core to how software is designed and developed...and no SW architect, which is the career pinnacle of someone who stays on the technical non-management track, worth their salt would design without a deep understanding all of the use cases for the SW being developed. Look for forward cites of at least these, there from a number listed by the National Center for Women in Technology, which partners with Google and a number of other software companies. Baugh, S. & Graen, S. (1997). Effects of team gender and racial composition on perceptions of team performance in cross-functional teams. Groups and Organization Management, 22(366), 366–379. Cady, S. & Valentine, J. (1999). Team innovation and perceptions of consideration — what difference does diversity make? Small Group Research, 30(730), 731–745. Kochan, T., Bezrukova, K., Ely, R., Jackson, S., Joshi, A., Jehn, K., ...Thomas, D. (2003). The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the diversity research network. Human Resource Management, 42(1), 3-21. Dwyer, S., Richard, O., & Chadwick, K. (2003). Gender diversity in management and firm performance: The influence of growth orientation and organizational culture. Journal of Business Research, 56, 1013–1017. What is interesting to note is that there is a trend in many of these studies. In order to achieve benefits, a lot of active management was required to deal with different communication styles and intergroup conflicts. In other words, when management was hands off, mixed groups did not show increased performance. One study in particular surprised me. It seemed to find that more diverse teams came up with fewer ideas, than non diverse teams, but there was no difference in terms of the quality of the ideas. Of course many of these studies are contradicted by other studies showing benefits. Hence why I say they're mixed. |
Anonymous
Calling someone a "sphincter" instead of an "a$$h0l3", while less crass and more scientific-sounding, is not not respectful. Sometimes the content more than the form matters. Damore didn't just call into question the skills of his colleagues, he asserted that his leadership had no idea what they were doing and they were harming the company. If he wanted to open a dialogue, he would have asked whether there was evidence for the benefits of the policies that Google had implemented or suggested that maybe they had missed the way those policies negatively affected him and should also take those into account in their assessments. Instead, he asserted that Google's engineering teams were weak because of things like "pair-programming" whereas independent coding was the true measure of ability. While his point was to call into question Google's diversity policies, he was effectively dismissing the entire way Google has structured its working teams and calling them ineffective. I know people, men and women, who have been fired from "at-will employment" jobs for simply hinting at that, let alone writing a 10 page manifesto, because it's so destructive to team morale. This happened to a female friend of mine at a SV tech company recently, and she along with everyone else who knows about what happened agree that her being asked to leave was reasonable because her attitude *was* hurting team morale. |
Anonymous
FWIW, if the study results range from "no real difference" to "possible benefits", then the prudent thing would be to increase diversity because there isn't an obvious downside but there is a possible upside. I haven't read your links, though ,so perhaps I'm over-simplifying. At the end of the day, it's Google's call, not mine. |
Anonymous
| ^^PP again. Thanks for sharing the links. I will check them out. |
Anonymous
No problem, you will find that they show benefits as well. They're not really, OMG diversity is so horrible. |
Anonymous
FWIW, google can be your friend... https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/vikings/2016/08/28/alex-boone-rips-colin-kaepernick-national-anthem-49ers/89514450/ |
Anonymous
Try again, genius. "Marines" are not a protected class under federal discrimination law. |
Anonymous
He was still offended, just like some of the liberals and women at Google. You can't qualify an "offended" person and clearly reaching on the protected class theory. |
Anonymous
I don't even know what you're trying to argue. Kapernick was pretty clearly making statements based on his OWN membership in a protected class; the backlash against him was expressly racist. Damore made statements AGAINST a protected class, which contributed to a hostile work environment, and justifies his termination. He also exhibited insubordination against a key policy. But Kapernick had a contract; Damore did not. So to the extent that any insubordination from Kapernick could be separated from his protected conduct (unlikely) he still couldn't be fired. |
Anonymous
Oh darn. I went to a top 10 CS program and never saw the AA problem sets, projects, and tests. Guess I missed those. Would have made dean's list much easier. |
Anonymous
Don't you just love the "move the goalpost" moment above. You (or someone else) referenced federal law and marines, and I refuted it as someone being offended. You expanded it to a contract issue which I never brought up, rather I always focus on someone being offended. The same application at google applies - some were offended, could be one or thousands. That is why Damore was fired and yet the lefties fail to see why that is an issue in their PC world. Comical. |
Anonymous
Damore likely knew that he was protected from dismissal by California state law, which prohibits a firm from firing an employee for his political beliefs. I would say the complaint to NLRB was more an insurance policy to that same end. For a company to fire someone who had filed a NLRB complaint is considered illegal retaliation. That gave Damore two good reasons to believe he would not be nailed to the cross for the memo. That is why he was surprised that they ignored these legal protections in favor of summary virtue signaling. Damore anticipated he was dealing with a rational organization and he actually proved the opposite is true. |
Anonymous
Lots of people may have disagreed with Kaepernick, even some of his teammates or opponants. But Kaepernick didn't suggest that his teammates weren't good football playesr. If you were a coach, and had a player write a 10 page manifesto about how terrible the quarterback was, and how he shouldn't really be there, you would be well within your rights to fire said player. |
Anonymous
I still don't understand what you're saying. The fact that someone was "offended," on its own, has never been relevant either to civil rights law or notions of fairness on the left. Obviously, some people were very offended at women entering the workplace, black people using the same swimming pools, etc. That has nothing to do with the law or policy of civil rights. The fact that Kapernick offended some people and Damore offended some people, without more context, is meaningless. So what, again, are you trying to say? |
Anonymous
I'm not familiar with all the ins-and-outs of California employment law (though I am employed in California), but I am doubtful that protection for political beliefs extends to protection for stating them in a disruptive manner. A pretty good defense for Google that his firing was not about his political views but rather about the impact his actions had on his workplace is the fact that none of the people who indicated support for his views were rooted out and fired. And again, while I'm unfamiliar with the relevant statute in detail, I know in general filing an NLRB complaint is not automatic protection against firing. You have to demonstrate that your firing was specifically retaliation for filing the claim. It's highly unlikely that Damore can make that case. Honestly, I'm fairly certain Damore knew he would be fired. The swift support he's gotten and the speed with which he's filed legal complaints suggest this was all staged to drive toward a judicial review of diversity policies in the private sector. It's a tactic used frequently by the left and right to drive policy change via the court system. I'm fine with the system being used this way, but let's not pretend Damore is a victim. He's no more a victim than Rosa Parks was, who also acted specifically to get her case brought before the courts. But I would say only one of these people is truly a civil rights activist. |