A Google software engineer recently circulated an opinion piece on the nature of inclusion and diversity efforts within the company, and it’s causing quite a stir.
The document itself sticks to a few core theses that the author finds problematic about the company’s focus on achieving equal representation in the workforce.
Digging a hole
First, the author opines that an attempt to reach a perfect 50/50 gender representation isn’t feasible, due to differences in population distribution and differences in “leadership” traits between men and women. That second part has a lot of folks riled up; the author states his beliefs as follows:
“On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because:
- They’re universal across human cultures
- They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone
- Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males
- The underlying traits are highly heritable
- They’re exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective
Note, I’m not saying that all men differ from women in the following ways or that these differences are “just.” I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership.”
Aside from the offense taken to the thesis itself, critics take issue with its implication that a woman’s biological nature is inferior for leadership and for work in the tech sector.
Second, the author states that systems in place at Google strive to achieve diversity for diversity’s sake, which makes it a moral issues instead of a cost/benefits decision. The author believes that the following company practices are evidence of this ideology:
“Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race
- A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates
- Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate
- Reconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias)
- Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination”
No way out of this hole
Finally, the author believes that the culture around the diversity initiative creates a complex around protecting the victims. In such a culture, those who disagree become villanized, and contrarian opinions are silenced and shamed. As a result of this mindset, he believe, an honest dialogue of the issue cannot occur because it prioritizes feelings over facts.
Part of the discomfort around this manifesto stems from gender discrimination and harassment issues in Silicon Valley as a whole.
We’ve all seen what Uber is going through in regards to the latter. Google itself is reportedly facing an investigation regarding gender-based compensation discrimination. In that light, it’s easy to see this mindset as emblematic of the problem inside these companies.
The author himself wants to be clear that he believes that racism and sexism exist and should be confronted. However, he believes that a better solution is to “treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism).”
In that, he arguably makes his best point.
There are plenty of studies that conclude that blind tests of performance, aptitude and personality fit yield the best decisions because they eliminate inherent biases and assumptions.
At the same time, companies do need to examine how their values may overly incentivize individuals with a certain personality, aptitude or opinion, in order to avoid creating an echo chamber.
However, in focusing on questionable science around the nature of gender and the nature of opinion shaming, his argument becomes clouded and ineffective.
Tribalism not so far fetched
Google’s response seems to play into his thesis. Danielle Brown, Google’s new VP of Diversity, Integrity and Governance, released a statement saying that the opinion piece, “advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.”
She goes on to reiterate that diversity is a core value to Google and that they will continue to work towards that change. However, the tone hints at a tribalism that the author believes exists in the company.
$100m reimagined convenience store startup to open 25 stores in 2022
(BUSINESS) Foxtrot is looking to redefine the convenience store as we know it. This startup is looking to make it a whole new experience.
Move over 7-11, there’s a new player in town! There’s always room for competition, even in the world of convenience stores. Yes, you read that right, Quick Trip has some serious competition from a newcomer, Foxtrot.
Foxtrot is a curated, modern convenience store offering a brisk 30-minute delivery and 5-minute pick-up. It was created by Mike LaVitola and Taylor Bloom in 2014. These stores will undoubtedly be popular in walkable areas, but also with their online ordering convenience. This modern version of a convenience store offers the combination of an upscale corner store with a digital-first e-commerce platform. Sounds pretty glorious, right?
However, the original convenience store is safe as long as people are traveling and need to stop for gas or a restroom break. If you’re from Texas, then you know and love, Buc-ee’s, the Texas-born chain. Buc-ee’s have been creating their own in-store products garnering a cult following among their customers. Still, Buc-ee’s doesn’t have an online ordering or delivery option unless it’s offered through a third party.
Foxtrot has raised $160 million in Series C funding and they are expecting to open 25 locations in many cities in 2022. There are a few different levels of funding. If a company makes it to Series C funding, they are already successful and looking to expand or develop new products per Investopedia.
According to Retail Dive, “About half of the new stores will be in Chicago, Dallas and Washington, where all of the 16 stores Foxtrot currently operates are located, LaVitola said. The tech-focused retailer is also planning to begin operations in Boston and Austin, and intends to open four or five new stores in each of those cities during the next year and a half, he said.”
Foxtrot is testing out technology equipment that would allow customers to leave the store without stopping to checkout at the counter. They plan isn’t to go entirely self-service, but as the creator LaVitola stated, “the more hours we can allocate towards sampling and storytelling and interacting with customers and less [on] tasks that don’t add on to value, like checkout, that’s great.”
Foxtrot is redefining convenience by including carefully curated products. They aim to offer local popular products as well core pantry items. They aim to make the commonly unpleasant experience of convenience stores enjoyable. Let’s hope they succeed.
What small business owners can learn from Starbucks’ new D&I strategy
(BUSINESS) Diversity and inclusion have been at the forefront of Starbucks’ mission, but now they’re shifting strategy. What can we learn from it?
Starbucks was one of many companies that promised to focus on diversity and inclusion efforts after the death of George Floyd by Minneapolis police in 2020. What sets Starbucks apart from other companies were its specific goals.
How It Started
They began with hiring targets and have now added goals in corporate and manufacturing roles. Starbucks’ plans and goals revolve around transparency for accountability. They released the annual numbers for 2021 as a way to help hold themselves accountable. The data they’ve released so far show that they’ve met nearly a third of their 2025 goals according to Retail Brew. Because of this information, we can see why they are choosing to move in the direction of manufacturing and corporate jobs. In 2021, POC’s fell to 12.5% of director-level employees from 14.3% in 2020 in manufacturing.
How It’s Going
Per Starbucks’ website stories and news, “[I]t will increase its annual spend with diverse suppliers to $1.5 billion by 2030. As part of this commitment, Starbucks will partner with other organizations to develop and grow supplier diversity excellence globally.” To put that into perspective, they spent nearly $800 million with diverse suppliers in 2021. With these moves, by 2030, it will increase by almost double.
As part of their accountability and progress, they plan to partner up with Arizona State University to give out free toolkits to entrepreneurs on fundamentals for running successful diverse-owned businesses. Another goal they’ve listed is to boost paid media representation by allocating 15 percent of the advertising budget to minority-owned and targeted media companies to reach diverse audiences.
At the heart of all this information on their goals and future plans, data transparency and accountability are what’s forcing them to look at the numbers to make specific goals. They are doing more than just throwing money at the problem, they are analyzing how they can do better and where the money will make a difference. Something that, as entrepreneurs, we should all do.
Peloton is back-pedaling: Reports of price increases, layoffs, and cost cuts
(BUSINESS) After a recording of layoffs leaks, ‘supply chain’ issues cause shipping increases, and they consult for cost-cutting, Peloton is doomed.
Is Peloton in Trouble?
According to many reports, Peloton had success early in the pandemic when gyms shut down. Offering consumers a way to connect with a community for fitness along with varying financing options allowed the company to see growth when many other industries were being shuttered.
After two years, CNBC reports that the company is “being impacted by …supply chain challenges” and rising inflation costs. According to the report, customers will be paying an additional $250 for its bike and $350 for its tread for delivery and setup.
As demand has decreased, Peloton is also considering layoffs in their sales and marketing departments, overheard in a leaked audio call. The recording details executives discussing “Project Fuel” where they plan to cut 41% of the sales and marketing teams, as well as letting go of eCommerce employees and frontline workers at 15 retail stores.
Nasdaq reported that the stock fell 75% last year, after a year where it soared over 400%.
Peloton reviewing its overall structure
According to another report from CNBC, Peloton is working with McKinsey & Company, a management consulting firm, to lower costs as revenue has dropped and the growth of new subscriptions has slowed since the pandemic. Last November, according to NPR, Peloton had “its worst day as a publicly-traded company.” It also anticipates greater losses in 2022 than originally predicted. It makes sense that the company would reexamine their strategy as the economy changes. They aren’t the only one that is raising prices amid supply chain issues.
It will be interesting to watch how Peloton fares
Peloton has a large community that pays a monthly fee for connected fitness. While growth has slowed, the company still has a strong share of consumers. Although it is facing more competition in the home fitness market and more gyms are reopening, as Peloton adjusts to the new normal, it should remain a viable company.
Business Marketing2 weeks ago
10 must-listen-to podcasts for business owners
Opinion Editorials1 week ago
Job listings are popping up left and right, so what exactly *is* UX writing?
Business Entrepreneur2 days ago
Here’s why receiving big funding doesn’t guarantee startup success
Opinion Editorials1 day ago
Hustle culture glorification needs to stop
Business Entrepreneur1 week ago
Positive self-talk can improve your performance
Tech News3 days ago
Offer customers a frictionless online experience with these updates
Business Finance1 week ago
Get outstanding invoices paid to you by following these 7 steps
Business Entrepreneur1 week ago
‘Small’ business is a point of pride in the US, no longer a stigma