Let's say a lot of people in software agree with you. I think they're wrong, but that doesn't matter. Here's the thing: When we analyze hiring, we often act like it's some kind of two-person game:
You place ads, interview people, select the best person, make them an offer, and boom, you're done.
But it isn't a two-person game. It's a market, and you're actually competing with all the other hiring companies, just as the candidate is competing with all the other people you interview.
Under the circumstances, I suggest you crack open a copy of "Moneyball." The worst ROI is when you overpay for people who aren't actually great performers, but everyone is pattern-matching, and these people have the superficial attributes of a great hire.
Those people get more offers than good performers that don't have the right gender or didn't go to the right school or whatever. And it's expensive and hard to hire them.
Meanwhile, there's this woman over here, and that trans person over there, and that self-taught person over there, and so on, and so forth, and they are all cheap to hire because you have less competition for them.
Not only that, but if everyone is using hacks to save money by not advertising to them, it's easer to reach them. It costs less to advertise to them, and the qualified ones are more likely to click on your ads.
If you buy my Moneyball analogy, the highest ROI goes to those who can ferret out signals of hireability that are contrary to what the "market" uses.
You might still not want to use FB to reach qualified women, maybe it sucks for that, but you ought to ask, "How can I find those qualified women, everyone else's discrimination is my opportunity."
In which case, if you don't like the ROI on using FB to reach women, instead of thinking that advertising to women sucks, you should be brainstorming how to effectively advertise to women.
If you figure it out while everyone else ignores women, you win.
> But it isn't a two-person game. It's a market, and you're actually competing with all the other hiring companies
There's another related point here too: women and other people who form smaller groups in some context talk to each other. Have openly shitty approach to them - it will be known. Treat them with respect - you'll get recommendations in that employee market.
Let's say a lot of people in software agree with you. I think they're wrong, but that doesn't matter. Here's the thing: When we analyze hiring, we often act like it's some kind of two-person game:
You place ads, interview people, select the best person, make them an offer, and boom, you're done.
But it isn't a two-person game. It's a market, and you're actually competing with all the other hiring companies, just as the candidate is competing with all the other people you interview.
Under the circumstances, I suggest you crack open a copy of "Moneyball." The worst ROI is when you overpay for people who aren't actually great performers, but everyone is pattern-matching, and these people have the superficial attributes of a great hire.
Those people get more offers than good performers that don't have the right gender or didn't go to the right school or whatever. And it's expensive and hard to hire them.
Meanwhile, there's this woman over here, and that trans person over there, and that self-taught person over there, and so on, and so forth, and they are all cheap to hire because you have less competition for them.
Not only that, but if everyone is using hacks to save money by not advertising to them, it's easer to reach them. It costs less to advertise to them, and the qualified ones are more likely to click on your ads.
If you buy my Moneyball analogy, the highest ROI goes to those who can ferret out signals of hireability that are contrary to what the "market" uses.
You might still not want to use FB to reach qualified women, maybe it sucks for that, but you ought to ask, "How can I find those qualified women, everyone else's discrimination is my opportunity."
In which case, if you don't like the ROI on using FB to reach women, instead of thinking that advertising to women sucks, you should be brainstorming how to effectively advertise to women.
If you figure it out while everyone else ignores women, you win.