If two third of the world's female billionaires are in China, a country that doesn't give special favors to race or gender, female in this country can make it too. I, too, do not support special treatment to URM. Meritocracy lives!
http://qz.com/529508/china-is-home-to-two-thirds-of-the-worlds-self-made-female-billionaires/
If all we have is 1 and 2, then how does any work get done l?
1) and 2) are both coping mechanisms for surviving at Intel.
I was ISP'd less than 2 years after being recruited to Intel. I guess the lesson is that you need to pick 1) or 2) to survive
Stop complaining about diversity. As far as I can see and confirm reading some of the comments on this board as well as previously written/posted on face Intel, there are 3 types of long-term Intel employees:
Zombie employees - employees who work on useless, low or no value activities (attend meetings etc) as a way to get passing scores in focal. These people tend to have a good Intel "network" - other zombie friends that help by a) inviting, adding zombie employee as a member to no value projects; b) sending zombie employee's manager good reviews during the focal process and c) help zombie employee land a job or sabbatical coverage etc. if zombie is impacted by layoffs.
Back stabbing politicians - these spend their time complaining and talking negatively about their workers or even sub-ordinates to their manager and others. They take credit for others' work. They constantly kiss assand spend 100% of their time managing up.
Both
If you have worked at Intel 10+ years, you fall into one of these categories irrespective of your race, color, gender. FULL STOP. In case you did not notice, new employees are leaving, regardless of their diversity status or rank in the organization.
I support hiring diverse candidates (and efforts to support the pipeline of diverse candidates by encouraging women and minorities to get into STEM).
There are all sorts of good reasons to have a corporation that reflects the diversity of the country (i.e. people designing, selling, marketing, products that reflect the customers of those products).
That said, the way that we've rolled out the Diversity Initiative at Intel has been ham-handed and misguided. In order to hire someone who ISN'T a woman or underserved minority, a hiring manager (like me) must first in-person interview at least one woman or underserved minority candidate, even if there aren't any with the requisite skills or experience...and then justify (in a Powerpoint memo) to (in my case) my VP and then Diane Bryant why I can't hire the woman or minority (and why the other candidate is superior). They can approve or not approve and it slows everything down, makes people like me cynical about the whole thing and it doesn't even include some really important groups (e.g. vets, people with disabilities, etc.).
Like the mass-layoffs, BK wants numbers on this program. And he'll get numbers (win the battle) while hurting the culture of the company (losing the war).
The stupid re-structuring is actually counter-productive to diversity goals. Getting rid of Intel sites in places where minorities live and consolidating in places like Portland and Silicon Valley just makes it hard to recruit and retain them.
If Intel wants to be the employer of choice for THE BEST women and underserved minorities, then we need to out-compete the Google's of the world for them. The live in Hillsboro and sit in a cube approach is going to ensure that's not the case.
As an aside, didn't the woman in charge of the Intel Capital Diversity Investment Program just leave?
it's marketing, something like 80% of purchases are made by or directly influenced by women. traditional gender roles; men are the earners, women are the spenders. too bad intel has no products anyone wants to buy.
URM % is up because we hired "not the best candidate" ...And Intel circles again, slightly closer to the drain...
I agree the diversity intention is good. We want to hire the best regardless of background. We don't want hiring managers to favor Indians, Chinese, whites, or whatever and miss out on the best candidate. This change takes a huge effort. We'd have to recruit from many more schools, improve our interview process, and truly understand our innate biases. Instead of doing these hard things, hiring managers simply hire URM to meet the quota and ignored "hire the best" part. I believe hiring managers are to blame. If their department require them to hire a URM, then they should refuse to hire unless the best candidate is a URM. BK shouldn't be blamed for the vision, but only the execution. By setting an arbitrary goal, he gave an incentive for people to cheat. How in the world can you realistically expect >50% of new hires will be URM and they will be the best when URM candidate represent <20% of the pool.
We have moved from best candidate to a URM that can do it as the top pick, pretty clear that is the marching orders from my boss. Just look around isn't it obvious!!!
China respects talents and hard working people, that is true. In chinese culture, people look down at kiss asspeople, they get bad names and bad reputation.
I think the initiative was Good but the way its waterfall to the managers, not sure If BK intentionally made the whole think stupid / disaster. Managers are hiring Minority candidates as they are instructed to achieve respective number in their team. You can guess how the interview process are conducted to achieve that.
Clearly, they now have to share the number to employees/ public, and they will do all possible stupid act to make that look good . No one is f**king caring about Best possible candidates for the position.
Google & linkedin also have diversity things going . Check on the view how their company's head present and approach these problem online. After reading, them - You can see who wrong we are tackling these .
We are preferring Underrepresented candidates v/s Best talent available . I wont mind Intel paying More $ to Underrepresented candidates but it should be the best choice in terms of talent you are getting.