No one seems willing to answer thisand I'm sure the PC mods will delete, but this is a serious question.
what does the DEI team do for 40 hours every week? How many people work on that team?
My assumption is we spend several million a year on that team to create presentations about bigotry and racism?
The Supreme Court just ruled on this topic as it relates to college admission policies.
There will likely be some case that will reach the Supreme Court on the closely related topic of DEI hiring practices.
I expect the same decision to be made by them regarding hiring practices.
Solution have everyone take an IQ and EQ test and hire the people with the best scores
You've obviously not worked in a team where this has been the case. Those who think this tend to also consider themselves as top IQ (see Dunning-Kruger).
In teams where I've seen this, the "team" becomes a set of lone wolfs. Experts in certain topics often hoard information. Questions are answered with "RTFM" and "If you don't know then you don't deserve to be here". Teams hired this way have no path of growth or improvement. Having these people sprinkled around the org makes it tolerable, but it does not help the overall business (see No A--hole Rule).
It’s my way or the highway and I’m going to tell you what is my way like a drunk fool. The cult of the far left… the checkboxes for cult behavior check themselves.
“ LOL... you can cry and whine all you want, that is not going to happen. Because there is a Venn diagram showing that people usually equate merit and competence with people whose gender and looks match theirs. Companies are smart and know that if they leave it to people like you, companies will be majority populated by males.
Cry me a river.”
Solution have everyone take an IQ and EQ test and hire the people with the best scores. Oh but then you or someone else will say those are racist. Because anything outside of your definition of DEI is racist whomp whomp
In order for VMware to be truly diverse we need more people who identify as the feline xenogender and other xenogenders. Without this HR is only feigning progressive values and has no real intention of making our company a truly diverse workforce.
"DEI programs are divisive at best and destructive to organizations at worst. It is time for DEI to go away."
LOL... you can cry and whine all you want, that is not going to happen. Because there is a Venn diagram showing that people usually equate merit and competence with people whose gender and looks match theirs. Companies are smart and know that if they leave it to people like you, companies will be majority populated by males.
Cry me a river.
Most janitors do not have a college education. There needs to be more college educated Janitors, something is wrong in our society and it is my mission to correct this wrong.
We can simplify all this by making the hiring process a lottery.
This is why DEI arguments are bad faith.
Asians are a real minority in terms of numbers but they don’t wait for handouts most times.
So, this is not about minorities but specifically one of the majority (35% population) that constitutes URMs.
How many more years of handouts do you think will be needed before DEI is achieved (at the cost of the real minorities)
Tell me you are joking
How are URMs a minority? They are a minority in jobs needing college education but they constitute 35% of the country’s population. The term minority is misleading
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045222
A very long post conflating minority hires with criminal gangs, and that DEI brings in the unwanted.
Are you able to factually dispute anything in that post?
A very long post conflating minority hires with criminal gangs, and that DEI brings in the unwanted.
Not really. I saw the post.
The post gave an explanation for why despite their huge population, URMs need others to sacrifice for them.
It is true that they do not prefer the hard work of education.
Have you ever thought about the root cause of this issue even in an era when everyone bends over backwards for URMs? Everything is free for them and handed over in a platter. They just have to take it with a dose of education.
“The one from this morning, which received way too many upvotes, turned my stomach.“
Which one is that?
Post ID: @4jly+1ooVmdYK
You just admitted that DEI is discriminatory.
"...extra effort put in by recruiters to ensure the candidate pool is diverse."
No matter how hard the DEI crowd tries to justify DEI, it will always fail the test. The mere fact that your recruiter promoted, denied, or even selected one individual or group based on race, ethnicity, religion, se-ual orientation or any prescribed identity group, or ensured one individual or group was guaranteed placement for interview is wrong.
You simply cannot logically justify the discriminatory or promotional nature of DEI without dodging. I think it is you who does not understand DEI.
The simple logic of why DEI is wrongheaded is omnipresent and cannot be denied: It is wrong to judge an individual by their race, ethnicity, religion, se-ual orientation or any prescribed identity group; It is wrong to judge a group by their race, ethnicity, religion, se-ual orientation, or any prescribed identity group; It is wrong to assign a higher value of worth to an individual or group by their race, ethnicity, religion, se-ual orientation or any prescribed identity group; It is wrong to assign a lower value of worth to an individual or group by their race, ethnicity, religion, se-ual orientation or any prescribed identity group.
I see a litany of posts defending and supporting DEI here, but not a single one is rooted in logic. Instead, every last one justifies DEI with illogical, irrational, irrelevant, and feelings driven comments, even those scholarly or thinktank citations are complete rubbish.
DEI programs are divisive at best and destructive to organizations at worst. It is time for DEI to go away.
Post ID: @3ngg+1ooVmdYK -
You are making excellent points. You'd have to rewind time and focus on those companies that were studied, to get a better estimate on cause and effect. It's quite possible that those "successful" companies (I'm assuming McKinsey's financial assessment is OK as there are many ways to measure financial success vs. non-success...) were previously successful, and therefore had the means to diversify before they could diversify. AND/OR they could have been successful because their motives and methods for DEI was not just to prefer minorities, but rather they took some kind of better hiring practices that were more blind to traits and focused on performance and experience - which should result in increased diversity as you overcome some biases. However, the reason for that outcome is the proper methods used, not BECAUSE the person was black/women/etc.
Like you said, I can then see all these companies point to such a study as "proof" that DEI is the prime cause of better outcomes. That's the easy headline, but the causal factor is incorrect. It's not BECAUSE you have different skin tones on your board. It's because if you adopt more purely outcome-focused hiring practices, or offer top $ to jobs so that it attracts the top of each talent pool, etc. - then your diversity should increase as well as your outcomes.
I'd be interested in the follow-up studies, and the comparing the leaders vs. the followers. What is the "diverse" groups experience and skill sets of the successful companies vs. the follower-companies that are trying to force DEI? Compare those in the top roles and I bet a lot of the leader companies, where DEI is a result of better hiring practices not a forcing of hiring practices, have a much more experienced and outcome-focused DEI staff.
VMware is heavily Indian-American in its senior leadership, and I wonder if this makes us considered DEI at senior leadership? As a non-Indian, it sure appears to me like Indians are preferred at the senior levels, and if that's considered diverse, then we should be doing great on the DEI-scale!
Give it a generation. I see Indian mom's selling girl scout cookies for their disinterested/spoiled Americanized daughters. But you're driving a Range Rover now. Welcome to America!
Stop cringing person who thinks we believe minority candidates are less qualified because they are minorities. It’s not true!
URM or DEI candidates can be every bit as talented and qualified as any non DEI candidates, the problem is there are the smallest percentage of the applicant pool.
I’ll say it again the main problem is the applicant pool does not mirror the DEI goals HR has put into place. Sometimes there are no DEI applicants at all. But HR will not let you move forward on a hire that is non DEI until you have interviewed DEI candidates and given them preference. Then you literally have to prove that those DEI candidates were not a good fit so that you can move forward with the qualified non DEI candidate.
If there was larger pool of DEI applicants this wouldn’t be a problem and this whole DEI thing would work itself out naturally without HR feeling the need to create a discriminatory program. But alas HR does not understand this problem, nor will they ever try to because they are virtue signaling. Virtue signaling is the whole purpose of the program. It’s not because it will make the company successful financially. If you care about that then you just hire the best people regardless of their race religion or se-ual preferences. Our DEI program is virtue signaling and a way for leadership to distract from their business and technology failures and impotence.
If you are a DEI candidate we are glad you are here. But it’s the HR department who created this DEI program that has disrespected you and your skills by assigning you to a group vs treating you like an individual. If you are a DEI candidate be mad at them, not the silent majority who oppose this discriminatory program.
very fractionally small but vocal minority of workers
It seems you don't understand how widely appreciated DEI is. There is a small percentage who are passionate about it, a large percentage who support it because it has no negative impact on them, and an extremely tiny percentage who fight against it. Those in that tiny percentage think they're in the majority and that others are too afraid to speak up. Nope. Everyone just doesn't care. "Takes almost zero effort but has a benefit to my fellow person, so why not support it."
If they're the best candidate, why does it matter if they are a minority?
That was answered in the part you didn't quote. Just because someone applies to the job doesn't mean they will take it. Interviews go both ways, and we've had top-choice candidates decline because they didn't like what they learned. Either work-life balance was off, or work was too much for the role. In one case, I had a candidate ask about the existing diversity of the team. It may not have been the decider, but it helped them decide to accept the offer.
There is a distinct lack of hiring managers on this page who have not had to beg a candidate to accept an offer.
DEI makes companies more profitable so it will continue. Broadcom does it. Everyone does it. The anti woke culture warriors are fighting a losing battle
If any VMware exec reads this page, you can bet they will simply double down on DEI initiatives. They will do so because they don't want to face the wrath of a very fractionally small but vocal minority of workers that will scream bloody mu---r. They will do so because they don't want to draw the ire of leftist government politicians now or at a later date. It's a safe bet, you can count on execs to continue to ignore the overwhelming majority of workers which do not support DEI. You know the majority, they stay tight lipped and lie on every DEI survey because they don't want to get bashed, cancelled, and lose their jobs. It's the majority who are posting here under pseudonyms or anonymously.
In some cases, a minority candidate is the best hire for the job
If they're the best candidate, why does it matter if they are a minority?
The unspoken point of some here is that many believe a DEI hire is not qualified. In some cases, a minority candidate is the best hire for the job. However, you are hoping they accept your job offer vs. their other offers. A DEI program is a bare minimum, low-effort initiative to entice highly skilled minorities to join your team. We are not robots, and are not here to sit and create widgets. Work is a strong part of people's social lives. Why waste 40+ hours of your life as the only minority in a team that treats you like a cog?
It's cringe to read here that many treat DEI like it's Replacement Theory.
"you are basically making the point of the anti-DEI crowd. There is no correlation between DEI programs and the success of the business."
Your words not mine. I said that it's impossible to prove that correlation in a single company, given the number of other variables. Hence the prior answer. I'm open to the data and I've personally seen diverse teams perform very well and a DEI focused hiring initiative work well. From your responses I am assuming that you have seen the opposite, which is fine, but your experience is not everyone's.
"Skills, experience, and talent are the biggest determinants of success, not a DEI program!"
That we can agree on at an individual level. But at a team level I also believe that a inclusive culture is a key determinant of success, especially in engineering teams. See Project Aristotle's findings on psychological safety and how an inclusive culture goes hand in hand with psychological safety.
I've not seen hiring quotas affect final hiring decisions in my group and would put the experience of others down to poor leadership trying to game a metric versus doing the right thing.
I don't care for top down HR led programs like pretty much everyone else, but I definitely enjoy working in and with teams that are accepting, inclusive and diverse.
Great intelligent response, and you are basically making the point of the anti-DEI crowd. There is no correlation between DEI programs and the success of the business.
What we can state for a fact is that if you start a technical business and you don't hire people with technical skills or experience, then it will fail 100% of the time, DEI program or not. Skills, experience, and talent are the biggest determinants of success, not a DEI program!
Lets lay out the reality of the situation with VMware's DEI program:
For all those reasons, everyone should be against our DEI program. Its distracting, its divisive, its discriminatory, and its only purpose is to virtue signal. Argue against these points if you want to have an intelligent conversation about it. But the benefits don't outweigh the cost of a VP of DEI, all the pod volunteers, and the time spent on meetings talking about DEI or tech and business.
ProDEI person: I have the power of invisibility
Responder: ok show me, please go ahead and disappear
ProDEI person: It only works when you're not looking
Responder: ….
Actually this is how it goes:
ProDEI person: DEI is directly linked to companies financial success
Responder: Then why is VMware failing after years of embracing DEI?
ProDEI person: Michael Dell
Responder: So the DEI magic only works in certain situations?
ProDEi person: Yes
Responder: So how do we know DEI is effective or not?
ProDEI person: …..all you care about are white dudes
Responder: it appears we cannot have an intelligent conversation about reality
From Mckinsey
"Our 2019 analysis finds that companies in the top quartile for gender diversity on executive teams were 25 percent more likely to have above-average profitability than companies in the fourth quartile—up from 21 percent in 2017 and 15 percent in 2014 (Exhibit 1)."
"Moreover, we found that the greater the representation, the higher the likelihood of outperformance. Companies with more than 30 percent women executives were more likely to outperform companies where this percentage ranged from 10 to 30, and in turn these companies were more likely to outperform those with even fewer women executives, or none at all. A substantial differential likelihood of outperformance—48 percent—separates the most from the least gender-diverse companies."
"In the case of ethnic and cultural diversity, our business-case findings are equally compelling: in 2019, top-quartile companies outperformed those in the fourth one by 36 percent in profitability, slightly up from 33 percent in 2017 and 35 percent in 2014. As we have previously found, the likelihood of outperformance continues to be higher for diversity in ethnicity than for gender."
The folks here are arguing against DEI programs when diversity is shown to correlate strongly with financial performance. So I guess my question is, how much money would you be okay with VMware losing to avoid encouraging more diversity and inclusion?
What a weird hill to die on. And what the he-l does this topic have to do with the impending layoffs?
Source: https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters
More DIY less DEI nonsense please. Half of the time in all hands being spent in this DIE pod cr-p versus the business is ridiculous. The list of banned words that could possibly offend someone is comical yet sad we pay people to come up with this sh-t.
God forbid VMW have a merit based system. We might look like professional sports
Which POD is the most useless?
Loudest and most obnoxious?
You have to worry about the quiet ones, the pea pods.
More than 70% male is not “plenty diverse.
More than 75% of health care workers are women.
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/08/your-health-care-in-womens-hands.html
THE HORROR! the horror…
Every profession MUST have the EXACT ratio of every identifiably characteristic of every person in the US otherwise you are RACIST!
Speaking of stuff being shoved down our throats, power point templates have placeholders for pronouns. I think everyone knows how to fill in the appropriate info without “guidance”.
The plan is simple, fire people such that those who remain are the exact ratios of ethnicity as found in the US. If that can’t be achieved within a group, dissolve the group.
Which POD is the most useless?
Loudest and most obnoxious?
“VMW is plenty diverse, to constantly harp on useless DEI scores is senseless.”
More than 70% male is not “plenty diverse.
A lot of great responses to the OPs question. One common thread I've seen Pro DEI people respond with, "hes a trumper, white and racist". I got news for ya, I'm not white or a trumper. I'm middle of the road politically, voted for Biden. What I take offense with is several fold, DEI is SHOVED down our throats. The virtue signaling is non stop. VMW is plenty diverse, to constantly harp on useless DEI scores is senseless. We are also a software company, what matters is production, innovation and merit. DEI initiatives would rather focus on feel good nonsense to either justify their virtuosity or own sense of social justice. Hey, if you want to truly help the world, there are much better ways. Instead of thosuands of dollars and hrs on DEI events, donate that to charity.
Also, I'll point out that some pods are louder than others. The optics look to me like their volunteers think podwork is their only job. If thats truly the case, their teammates probably have to carry the additional load....all in the name of virtue signaling.
There is a gray area here. Ideally a common ground. Someone called out MD as the source of this company's problems, while others blame DEI. The truth lay somewhere in between.