This is the second in a series of three or four posts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The first one, diverse teams perform better<\/a>, explored some of the research on the measurable performance advantages that diverse teams have over monocultures. This and future posts will share real world examples about measuring and correcting for the bias that leads to a lack of diversity. I hope to build a toolkit of useful techniques that can reduce bias in recruiting, hiring, promotion, and retention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I believe that my professional communities \u2013 high performance computing, biotech, data science, genomics, and the adjacent specialties \u2013 have a bias problem. Eventually, I hope to make that argument in some detail. Posts like this are the necessary groundwork. I hope you will bear with me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Unfortunately, a lot of readers are about to check out on me. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Even though this post is absolutely not about subjective personal<\/em> labels like \u201cracist\u201d or \u201csexist,\u201d conversations about the specifics of measuring bias seem to land for some folks as accusations of bigotry. I\u2019ve had more than a few friends and colleagues turn belligerent and hostile at this point in the conversation. I\u2019ve been told that even wanting to talk about diversity beyond a high and fluffy level makes me sound like the \u201cdiversity police.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n Apparently nobody likes the diversity police.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bluntly, if a person can\u2019t bear to even talk about how one might measure and compensate for bias, it\u2019s a pretty safe bet that their organization is rife with it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Still, I\u2019m not making personal accusations or calling anybody nasty names. Name calling is ineffective and misguided. It\u2019s a waste of time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Anne-Marie Slaughter<\/a> said, \u201csystemic bias does not require a conspiracy of men.\u201d The Harvard Business Review built on this in their 2016 piece Designing a bias-free Organization<\/a>: \u201c\u2026Rather than run more workshops or try to eradicate the biases that cause discrimination, companies need to redesign their processes to prevent biased choices in the first place.<\/em>\u201d Effective managers and leaders should focus on compensating for bias, rather than \u201cnaming and shaming.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Without the power to cut funding, terminate employment, or otherwise impose consequences \u2013 naming and shaming just enrages powerful, biased people. That\u2019s never a good scene.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Still, I acknowledge that we\u2019re on uncomfortable ground. In a good-faith effort to keep my HPC, biotech, and genomics friends engaged, I will start off with an absolutely non-tech-centric example in which I cannot possibly be talking about them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Let\u2019s go to the symphony.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It sounds strange to my modern ears, but symphony orchestras used to be predominantly male. In the 1970\u2019s, women accounted for only 6% of the players in top tier ensembles. By the 1990\u2019s that number had risen to 21%. One major factor in that increase was the practice of \u201cblind\u201d auditions, where the player is hidden from the view of the judges behind a curtain or a screen. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the 2000 study Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of \u201cBlind\u201d Auditions on Female Musicians<\/a>: \u201cUsing a screen to conceal candidates from the jury during preliminary auditions increased the likelihood that a female musician would advance to the next round by 11 percentage points. During the final round, \u201cblind\u201d auditions increased the likelihood of female musicians being selected by 30%.<\/em>\u201c<\/p>\n\n\n\n No quotas, no diversity police, no name calling. Just a curtain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Let\u2019s look at how that worked in practice:<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 1980, Abbie Conant<\/a> auditioned for principal trombone <\/a>of the Munich Philharmonic. The orchestra did not usually do blind auditions, but in this case one of the applicants was a relative of the decision maker, so they decided to guard against any appearance of favoritism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oops.<\/p>\n\n\n\n By all accounts, Conant blew the doors off that audition, performing well enough that one judge leapt to his feet, saying \u201cthere\u2019s our trombone.\u201d On finding out who \u201ctheir trombone\u201d was, the director was nonplussed. He demoted her to second chair, paid her less than her peers, and spent years trying to get her fired. <\/a>Conant spent more than a decade waging a rather epic lawsuit against the orchestra while at the same time building an international reputation as a soloist and teacher.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Berlin Philharmonic didn\u2019t do another blind audition for nearly 20 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\nHang In There<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Curtain Call<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Mere Numbers<\/h2>\n\n\n\n