I assure you that a job that ask for a code-ninja is going to tell everyone that you're a terrible company that will screw over the guy who applied, exploiting his/her ego, before sending a...
She says Textio taught her company to avoid terms such as "coding ninja" - a common phrase in Silicon Valley job ads.
"These words send a message to women that these are hostile work environments for female staffers," says Ms Blanche.
I assure you that a job that ask for a code-ninja is going to tell everyone that you're a terrible company that will screw over the guy who applied, exploiting his/her ego, before sending a message just for the women.
It seems that the article would be better framed as "How companies can use language in job adverts to encourage more women to apply." The current title makes it sound like companies are...
It seems that the article would be better framed as "How companies can use language in job adverts to encourage more women to apply." The current title makes it sound like companies are intentionally avoiding female employees
That's true, especially because Textio made it a point to say that they don't know why some words work and some don't. Or they specifically don't do that research and instead let their clients...
That's true, especially because Textio made it a point to say that they don't know why some words work and some don't. Or they specifically don't do that research and instead let their clients draw their own conclusions.
All the examples given are neutral, accurate descriptions of the job requirements (except maybe "code ninja"). If applicants perceive bias here, the onus should be on them to evaluate their...
All the examples given are neutral, accurate descriptions of the job requirements (except maybe "code ninja"). If applicants perceive bias here, the onus should be on them to evaluate their prejudices, not on the companies who wrote the listings. I think it's silly to ask the writers to bend over backwards trying to predict what subtexts readers will bring to the table.
I don't think it's so simple as to put the onus on the applicants, considering that it really can indicate things about either the company culture or even prejudices people have about who fits the...
I don't think it's so simple as to put the onus on the applicants, considering that it really can indicate things about either the company culture or even prejudices people have about who fits the role of a job.
I'd encourage you to look at an article exploring a tangential phenomenon called How Social Media Became a Pink Collar Job, that even touches on the same ideas as this article at the beginning.
I don't disagree, but I guess if a company wants more diversity, this is important for them to be aware of. And on the flip side, it's important for anyone applying to jobs to be aware of why they...
I don't disagree, but I guess if a company wants more diversity, this is important for them to be aware of. And on the flip side, it's important for anyone applying to jobs to be aware of why they may be choosing to skip of certain ads.
Edit to add: Surprisingly some very "neutral" sounding language is not neutral, though I agree the examples in the article are quite neutral sounding to me.
I disagree with your assertion but agree with your recommented solution. I am a woman, and a minority, and have worked in a professional position where I supervised a team. I DO think that ads...
I disagree with your assertion but agree with your recommented solution.
I am a woman, and a minority, and have worked in a professional position where I supervised a team. I DO think that ads should be encouraging to both sexes...but NOT when it misrepresents the company culture.
Out of those 80% more women who applied, how many hit the male language based interview criteria? How many were actually hired? How many of them stayed past the initial hiring in the male dominated work environment?
I'm not knocking male culture. I just think it's over represented. And I'd rather read the "gender neutral" ads that attract mostly men as a fair warning that I will have to run with the "boys" in the company.
Absolutely! I know you aren't saying this, but I don't think placing the onus solely on employers was the intention of the research firm that presented the data. I'm frustrated with those at...
Absolutely! I know you aren't saying this, but I don't think placing the onus solely on employers was the intention of the research firm that presented the data. I'm frustrated with those at Textio who suggest the solution here is to replace the terms instead of reinforcing the message that POC and women are welcome and encouraged to apply. Women can "build" things--they aren't restricted to just being creative. Women can be "leaders", and they should be offered the opportunity to lead. And they sure as hell can be competitive (seriously, I fear the chick on the opposing team full of guys--she's going to clean up). To suggest that we replace these words with "supportive" and "interpersonal" is an insult.
Even the format of a job ad can make a difference.
Textio's analysis reveals that ads with lengthy bullet points detailing the role's responsibilities will face a drop-off in women applying for the job.
This is a real concern. To me, this harkens back to a recent study with grade-school boys and girls and their corresponding confidence in their math abilities (https://globalnews.ca/news/3909143/confidence-in-math-has-become-a-major-problem-for-girls-in-school/). Even at such young ages, "only 49 per cent of Grade 3 girls in Ontario agreed that they were good at math compared to 62 per cent of boys." To address this, I would curb the "must have the following" statement as most of the time it really is not--the company was just trying to "weed out" applicants. I'd also throw in additional language on top of encouraging statements welcoming women and POC by saying "willing to train". Plenty of companies do this, but they neglect to put it into their job postings.
Turned out to be an interesting article. Honestly, when I first started reading it, I thought it was going to talk about job ads that require lifting 50lbs unassisted for a desk job.
Turned out to be an interesting article. Honestly, when I first started reading it, I thought it was going to talk about job ads that require lifting 50lbs unassisted for a desk job.
I assure you that a job that ask for a code-ninja is going to tell everyone that you're a terrible company that will screw over the guy who applied, exploiting his/her ego, before sending a message just for the women.
It seems that the article would be better framed as "How companies can use language in job adverts to encourage more women to apply." The current title makes it sound like companies are intentionally avoiding female employees
For sure. The title was a bit clickbaity. It also talks briefly about minorities too, so they could easily make it even more general than that.
That's true, especially because Textio made it a point to say that they don't know why some words work and some don't. Or they specifically don't do that research and instead let their clients draw their own conclusions.
All the examples given are neutral, accurate descriptions of the job requirements (except maybe "code ninja"). If applicants perceive bias here, the onus should be on them to evaluate their prejudices, not on the companies who wrote the listings. I think it's silly to ask the writers to bend over backwards trying to predict what subtexts readers will bring to the table.
I don't think it's so simple as to put the onus on the applicants, considering that it really can indicate things about either the company culture or even prejudices people have about who fits the role of a job.
I'd encourage you to look at an article exploring a tangential phenomenon called How Social Media Became a Pink Collar Job, that even touches on the same ideas as this article at the beginning.
That's a really interesting article. Thanks for posting.
I don't disagree, but I guess if a company wants more diversity, this is important for them to be aware of. And on the flip side, it's important for anyone applying to jobs to be aware of why they may be choosing to skip of certain ads.
Edit to add: Surprisingly some very "neutral" sounding language is not neutral, though I agree the examples in the article are quite neutral sounding to me.
I disagree with your assertion but agree with your recommented solution.
I am a woman, and a minority, and have worked in a professional position where I supervised a team. I DO think that ads should be encouraging to both sexes...but NOT when it misrepresents the company culture.
Out of those 80% more women who applied, how many hit the male language based interview criteria? How many were actually hired? How many of them stayed past the initial hiring in the male dominated work environment?
I'm not knocking male culture. I just think it's over represented. And I'd rather read the "gender neutral" ads that attract mostly men as a fair warning that I will have to run with the "boys" in the company.
Absolutely! I know you aren't saying this, but I don't think placing the onus solely on employers was the intention of the research firm that presented the data. I'm frustrated with those at Textio who suggest the solution here is to replace the terms instead of reinforcing the message that POC and women are welcome and encouraged to apply. Women can "build" things--they aren't restricted to just being creative. Women can be "leaders", and they should be offered the opportunity to lead. And they sure as hell can be competitive (seriously, I fear the chick on the opposing team full of guys--she's going to clean up). To suggest that we replace these words with "supportive" and "interpersonal" is an insult.
This is a real concern. To me, this harkens back to a recent study with grade-school boys and girls and their corresponding confidence in their math abilities (https://globalnews.ca/news/3909143/confidence-in-math-has-become-a-major-problem-for-girls-in-school/). Even at such young ages, "only 49 per cent of Grade 3 girls in Ontario agreed that they were good at math compared to 62 per cent of boys." To address this, I would curb the "must have the following" statement as most of the time it really is not--the company was just trying to "weed out" applicants. I'd also throw in additional language on top of encouraging statements welcoming women and POC by saying "willing to train". Plenty of companies do this, but they neglect to put it into their job postings.
Turned out to be an interesting article. Honestly, when I first started reading it, I thought it was going to talk about job ads that require lifting 50lbs unassisted for a desk job.