"Tons of great people, and, disproportionately, women and minorities, can perform less well at technical interviews but be great in role."
You lost all your credibility with one sentence. Congratulations.
You lost all your credibility with one sentence. Congratulations.
However, the rest of the article makes some good points (testing on the ability to do the job is a better predictor of job performance), you shouldn’t dismiss it out of hand.
Can you explain the basis for that opinion?
Perhaps the focus is wrong. Perhaps it's not the 'technical' part of the technical interview that causes this disparity. Perhaps it's just good ol' fashioned racism or prejudices, and really the part of the technical interview that causes a disproportionate number of white males to be hired is simply the fact that the interviews happen with the interviewer fully cognizant of the applicants race and gender. You'll notice that the article also mentioned their disdain for being able to see the applicant.
To dismiss a fact that reasonably straightforwardly follows from empirical evidence and limited options for causality is simply obstinancr.
That wasn't the claim.
Simpler explanation: there are less women applying and therefore less women selected. IMO framing an individual getting a job as “representing” a particular group is just faulty thinking created by a faulty ideology.
1. women and minorities are underrepresented. True. That does not imply there is sexism. In reality, women have a 2:1 chance over men to get hired, just because everyone is desperate to hire women. Be it to improve the image, whatever. Source http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2015/04/women-preferred-21-o...
2. Norway (correct me if I'm wrong on the country) experimented with genderless and faceless applications. The result: Men were actually favoured over women in STEM. How can we explain that? It's certainly not sexism.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this: it is very controversial to say men and women chose differently, but they do. And there's nothing wrong with that! Isn't that what early feminists fought for? Were is the "sexism" in plumbing, oil rigs, and other less desirable jobs? There are virtually only men on those jobs. Tells you what these "diversity" people really are: jealous.
EDIT: Grammar
Norway hired men more often than women with genderless applications. Science cannot explain this, just like the tides of the ocean, or magnets.
At the end of the day, people fighting for equal representation are just jealous, and they can't accept that their Y chromosome made them not want to work on an oil rig.