Controversial opinion: FB using RPM to get diversity hires. Had a cheeky search on Linkedin to look at all the RPM hires over the past few years. Every single one of them has been a woman and more likely than not, a woman of colour. I even watched a video where a current FB PM said that when she went for RPM they asked her to redo multiple interviews, I’m pretty sure no one else gets that opportunity unless they are trying to hire a specific candidate set. Thoughts? #facebook #rpm #diversity
Totally agree diversity could play a big role in short listing for 1st round interviews, especially in programs like this that directly aims to give people from non-traditional backgrounds a shot. Would be very disappointed and surprised if any modern company would lower the bar for technical rounds for certain groups but would like to hear other’s thoughts. Regarding the interview redo, I’ve heard that happening in a few blind posts where company needed another read to determine hire decision so I wouldn’t chalk that up to diversity exclusively
Yeah I think main issue is that they are deliberately excluding certain groups from being considered for the role - they very definition of discrimination... On the subject of interview redos, this specific lady had interview redos in two different rounds in two different areas, something the majority of people would never get the chance to do, not least in such a competitive role like RPM
I don’t think they’re deliberately excluding any group from RPM. Every photo I see of previous classes consists of a mix of races and genders, leaning heavily white/asian males. I think it’s fair to estimate ~80% of their applicants are white/Asian males but maybe only 40% of folks getting interviews are white/Asian males. I have mixed feelings about that process (as an Asian male), but I think as long as hire bar in following interviews is strictly the same, this is an OK way to hire diverse candidates equitably taking into account that certain groups may be disadvantaged earlier in the “funnel” (socioeconomic, upbringing, exposure to tech, network, education, etc...)
Dude it's not fucking parler
What's RPM?
Rotational PM
Similar to how goog is now asking managers to accelerate and faster promote folks from a certain community (given all the protests this year). mixed feelings since some do need that help because they haven't been given the opportunity they deserve but almost half will get a boost making it unfair for their peers who are equally capable but have a different skin color
Lol this post reeks of privilege. Poor white man given every opportunity to succeed yet complains when there’s emphasis being placed on boosting underrepresented numbers. 🤔
I think Equal Opportunity is vital, make sure the top of the funnel is as diverse as possible. But forcing the outcome based on race is discrimination, regardless of which race you’re discriminating against
Lol the issue with that statement google is you make the assumption everyone starts off on the same foot right out of the womb. Given intersectionality is a thing, how exactly do you ensure equal opportunity when hiring? Also unconscious bias is the biggest issue with hiring - which is why I’d think more teams would be interested in blind hiring but it’s still not really a thing most places.
They are just asking candidates that were clearly rejected on racial bias. FB will be sued soon because of race discrimination and it won't be pretty. They have so many black and Latino who were rejected because they were not a good cultural fit. I was one of them, they called me back but I suspect it is a sinister move to cover their behinds.
Yeah companies really need to stop with this this “cultural fit” BS. Folks complain about diversity hire tactics, yet no one calls out massive companies for what is basically an above the fold way of condoning racism, and furthering discrimination by saying - that person doesn’t really seem like they’ll fit in with us.
Can you please expand more on this? Facebook called you back recently?
I’m one of the PMs responsible for deciding which RPMs get the job (London). This is categorically false. The process is driven entirely by fairness, and is 100% down to merit. It’s a painfully transparent and measured system. Put simply, the best people get the job. Since RPMs don’t have a lot of industry experience, interview performance is our only signal. If women of colour are getting the job, it’s because they are doing better in interviews.
Could you shed some light in the process? Especially the “measured” aspect, would love to hear more about how this is done
I can’t provide specific details, but there are multiple axes for each interview, all which are scored 1-5. A score must be justified with clear examples, which will be questioned by others on the hiring panel during hiring meetings. If you don’t have examples for a given axis, there is no score given (this isn’t a bad thing for the candidate) - and ‘insufficient signal’ is recorded. If you don’t get a score in a few places, but have done well on all other axes, you might be asked to repeat an interview (the interviewer will know to focus on areas where the previous interviewer failed to get signal). The final people making hire/no hire decisions have (more often than not) never met the candidate, and have no idea about this race/gender/disability/whatever. Highest scores win.
Quelch I really must disagree with you, why is it then multiple sources have come out and admitted that RPM is in fact looking for diverse candidates? Why is it also then that the ratio of diverse candidates as a percentage of the population also so skewed? Also seems like every promo video about RPM features women heavily (which is a good thing) but can’t be a coincidence
Sometimes I find it difficult to have these conversations. Particularly on Blind. I have just told you, empirically, as one of the people responsible for making RPM hiring decisions, how it happens. But you would still rather fit a different narrative. Maybe some extra context will help: the company *is* looking for diverse candidates, that’s true, and is a good thing. Our recruiters aim to ensure that the candidates who make it through to a phone screen represent a broad range of backgrounds (although this is often hard to tell from a CV and phone conversation). Why are the promo videos female heavy? Obviously to encourage women to apply. They are underrepresented anyway - imagine if the video showed nothing but white men (like me), which is much more reflective of reality - they would be even less inclined to apply. However - once it get to the actual interviews, *none* of this matters. Race/gender more often than not isn’t known to the people who making the final hire/no hire call. In summary - the pipeline and advertising encourages diverse applications, but hiring decisions are 100% on merit.
Yeah as I said, you may be responsible for the hiring decisions but are you aware what the funnel looks like? I’m not talking about promo videos, I’m talking about the actual breakdown of candidates RPM had last year and the year before. What is the conditional probability that FB is looking for diverse candidates and that the RPM class has a very diverse pool vs the conditional probability that RPM is completely meritocratic and it has a diverse pool? Numerous people have told me that FB recruiters are free to choose who gets through and who doesnt get through to the next round. The recruiter screens are categorically not based on a score. Some of them are even known to publish articles on gender and ethnic diversity in the workplace, are you monitoring these recruiters to ensure they are not being discriminatory? You may be completely meritocratic based on interview scores but I’m talking about the whole process
Here is my interview experience with FB as a black person. It doesn't matter how good you are, they always have a secret weapon to use against you.The most used is what I call the "FU" question, a question they ask not related to the industry you work or role you are applying. When you get it and you have no proper answer or way to handle it, just know the interview is toast. Secondly, if you pass; they will send a battalion of behavioral questions experts to interview you. This i guarantee you will fail .
Or, maybe, you weren’t good enough. Like 99% of other people who apply.
Honestly though I would disagree. People always say the brightest people are working at Google and FB but to be honest having worked at Google, I would disagree. I’ve seen really good people get interviews and fail not because they werent good but because the interviewers had a bad day or because the interviewers couldnt be bothered to think about how good the candidate really is so gives them an average score. Also, it really does depend if the interviewer likes you. So no, I don’t think the 1% who get the job are the best
India
Yesterday
1192
Modi is a legend, will be remembered for centuries to come
Cars
Yesterday
874
Do you really feel special in your Tesla?
Tech Industry
3d
23667
Can I slack off as E9 at Meta?
Working Parents
18h
1296
Closed now - thank you all
Tech Industry
7h
868
Women, help me understand why this is inspirational
Of course they do. It’s very similar at workday and probably at google too. I have a lot of personal experience with diversity hiring practices
How is your experience? Good or bad? Kindly elaborate..