
Microsoft CEO does about-face on women and raises - orin_hanner
http://www.freep.com/story/money/business/2014/10/10/microsoft-satya-nadella-women-raises/17023777/
======
zdw
The guy misspoke. And he's being contrite and immediate about it. I'm inclined
to give him a break.

As someone who frequently thinks out loud as a way to work through ideas, I
totally get how you could say things that you don't mean or come off entirely
wrong given hindsight.

~~~
ebbv
Mis-spoke? He clearly thinks workers shouldn't ask for raises, they should
just shut up and take whatever their bosses give them.

On top of believing something as retrograde and absurd as that, he is tone
deaf to the especially unfair treatment of women.

Whether he should resign or not really depends on whether these views reflect
those of Microsoft's board of directors.

EDIT:

Apparently Microsoft has a sock puppet/shill brigade on HN now. That's
unfortunate.

~~~
smm2000
In general people do not ask for raises in big IT companies in US including
Microsoft, Google, Facebook and others. The raises are function of performance
review, title and budget with very little input from your actual manager. The
best way to increase your income is not to ask for a raise but to either get
promoted or find position at another company.

I have never ever asked for a raise in my life and I did pretty well for
myself.

~~~
ebbv
> In general people do not ask for raises in big IT companies in US including
> Microsoft, Google, Facebook and others.

Yes and do you think this benefits the workers or the companies?

You do know about the recent anti-trust lawsuit against several of the
companies you named for their non-poaching agreements right?

These companies do all that they can to hold their workers' wages down.

> I have never ever asked for a raise in my life and I did pretty well for
> myself.

Imagine how well you'd have done for yourself had you not been such a
pushover.

EDIT:

I will also add that it has always been my philosophy that if you do not feel
you deserve a raise, you're doing a shitty job.

------
cookiecaper
Nadella let his guard down and said something expressive of a true corporate
reality instead of a mindless politically-sanitized soundbite.

It really has nothing to do with women at all (except that he was asked the
question at a conference marketed primarily to women). Nadella was,
essentially, asked what he thought about employees asking for raises. He
expressed his real opinion that asking for a raise outside of formal review
contexts is in bad taste. This shows the real thought process behind an
executive that rises through the ranks; it doesn't matter if they're worth
more money, what matters is that they're endearing themselves to their bosses,
because _long-term_ that _just might_ end with you getting made CEO of
Microsoft, whereas harming that trust or sense of professionalism to demand an
extra $50 tacked on to your paycheck just might end up with your career at a
dead end.

Think what you want of it, but that's Nadella's real opinion, that he allowed
to accidentally slip because, for a moment, he didn't see the potential
political ramifications and just tried to provide some honest, substantive
career advice. Employees may not like the intimation that they can't just make
demands for things that they feel are deserved, but that's how successful
political operatives play the game, and politics absolutely is a real element
in any and every employment situation.

I think it's awesome when this kind of stuff gets exposed.

~~~
josephlord
I agree with your main point but while there is a pay gap between men and
women in similar roles within a company it is particularly an issue for gender
paid less (in practice women).

~~~
hnal943
Patio11 made a great point years ago which is still true.

 _For that matter, if you think that there is a vast pool of untapped female
talent working for 80% of the price of equivalent male talent… what are you
doing hiring men, again? That would suggest that you could field whole teams
of ladies and clean up._

[http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/02/23/women-men-and-other-
thin...](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/02/23/women-men-and-other-things-done-
wrong-by-silicon-valley/)

~~~
danielweber
Going through a job hunt, I wouldn't be surprised _at all_ to learn there are
a bunch of really nice employees out there, of all races and genders and ages,
that are being passed over for completely nonsense reasons.

~~~
hnal943
I think that's true, but irrelevant to the question of whether or not women
are paid equal wages for equal work. If they weren't, a company could cheaply
acquire the best talent by only hiring women.

------
mhurron
That was a stupid statement. Raises don't come to anyone who doesn't ask, men
or women. In addition, raises don't seem to come at all in IT, except by
changing jobs.

Unfortunately, when you feel it's time for your compensation to be bumped,
it's probably time to look for another job. And that's ignoring the situation
where you have a bad manager/company where asking for a raise will instantly
make the environment hostile.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Asking doesn't work in any corporation I've ever been at. There's an annual
review cycle.

~~~
mattmanser
It does work like that in those corporations. They just prefer you to think it
doesn't as it keeps wages down.

If a top sales guy walks into his manager's office and says he wants a 20%
hike, he'll be getting a 20% hike.

It's just you didn't try/get yourself in a strong enough position.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
I've been lucky in my career. I'm valued; I get paid well; I have equity and
perks.

------
Someone1234
This is why I'd avoid doing "pro women" events in general. If it goes well
nobody cares, if you slip up then everyone jumps all over you and calls you a
sexist. There's no win, no benfit.

Just avoid that entire area, the entire topic. There's no rational discourse
that can be had.

I think we all learned that after the "protests" over that public safety
briefing a few years ago where essentially a [male] police officer suggested
women could avoid some harrasment by exposing less, and it caused a "national
debate," and protests across the US.

I'm all for more women in tech. I just don't like most of the other people who
also feel that way, they're very sexist in their own right (but they consider
their sexism rightous which makes it even worse).

I seriously doubt if it was a women CEO we'd even be talking about identical
comments.

~~~
dneronique
> If it goes well nobody cares, if you slip up then everyone jumps all over
> you and calls you a sexist.

Most things in life are like this. Do what's expected and it's just another
day. Fuck up and you'd better prepare for a shitstorm.

~~~
cookiecaper
The point is it's a valid answer that wouldn't be considered a fuck up outside
of the context of a women's conference. Having that context attached makes
everything said much more dangerous.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
So its become poison to speak at women's conferences? You'll toe the PC line
or be raked over the coals by the public.

------
jaynos
"Not asking for a raise is 'good karma,' because someone will know that that's
the kind of person he or she will want to trust, he said."

It's not even about women. His statement shows that he's out of touch when it
comes to women AND men.

~~~
danielweber
It's standard manager-talk, worrying about how to keep a lid on the company's
#1 expense: salary.

Not that I agree with his viewpoint, but it's not hard, at all, to grok where
he's coming from.

------
onewaystreet
Employees shouldn't get raises because they ask for them, it should be part of
a company's annual review process.

~~~
VikingCoder
I had a job for four years at a small company, didn't get a single raise. I
told them I was quitting, and ON THE SPOT they offered to DOUBLE my salary.

No thanks. I'll be moving on.

~~~
danielweber
Happened to my cousin many years ago, except they offered to _triple_ his
salary.

People don't see how insulting this is. Internally, you've already decided you
are underpaying me by half, and think I'm a sucker.

------
rayiner
"I was inarticulate" is such bullshit. He was perfectly articulate in
expressing the message he did. It's the content people are reacting to, not
the presentation.

~~~
guardian5x
In a statement to Microsoft employees Thursday night, Nadella went further,
saying he was "completely wrong."

~~~
Methusalah
But others in this thread are acting as if he "misspoke" which clearly wasn't
the case.

------
shadowmint
It's not 'I was wrong', but its pretty darn close.

You have to give it to him, for better or worse on the original statement or
his actual views on the topic, he's sucking it up and admitting he was wrong.

That's more than I've been able to say for Microsoft in a long time.

~~~
SammoJ
If you read his e-mail he admits he was "completely wrong"

[http://news.microsoft.com/2014/10/09/satya-nadella-email-
to-...](http://news.microsoft.com/2014/10/09/satya-nadella-email-to-employees-
re-grace-hopper-conference/)

------
rectang
From a Gawker commenter (< [http://valleywag.gawker.com/i-became-ceo-by-
patiently-waitin...](http://valleywag.gawker.com/i-became-ceo-by-patiently-
waiting-and-having-faith-in-1644493722) >):

    
    
        "I became CEO by patiently waiting and having faith in the system."
    
        Said no CEO ever. 
    

I hope that Nadella and Microsoft will take this opportunity to institute
vigorous change rather than "having faith that the system" will close the wage
gap without intervention.

~~~
cookiecaper
I've met a lot of executives who've become executives with that type of
attitude. Affability is one of the key properties of a successful politician.
If you seem pessimistic, defeatist, etc., people are not going to want you to
be in a leadership position. You have to act like everything is sunshine and
flowers and project that image.

Nadella did become CEO by patiently waiting and practicing good politics,
which includes projecting a faith in the system and not ruffling feathers by
asking your bosses to pay you more money.

------
jasallen
He gave an off the cuff answer that was wrong. He didn't write an essay about
it that was proofread and considered. I'm not surprised that people are
assuming they 'know his heart' based on one quick answer, but I am
disappointed.

Something I've not seen pointed out elsewhere too, is that (unfortunately)
this is an answer that every manager of every large company has ready at the
tip of their tongue. It pops out from rote memorization. Not about women, but
about all employees: "We only give raises as part of the normal annual review
process. I understand you think your compensation needs to be reconsidered
because ...... and I'll make sure to discuss that with the rest of the
management team at review time." It's not good, but it's a well rehearsed blow
off answer for which every manager is trained.

I think he's a good guy who is handling the aftermath well. He gave a stupid
answer and apologized. I honestly the bigger mistake is telling employees to
trust the system, rather than a single off the cuff answer that didn't fit
well.

------
Steuard
Good for him for acknowledging his mistake. He seems to have moved fairly
quickly from his original flawed advice to an unsatisfying "[I] was
inarticulate" and on to a solid "I answered that question completely wrong".
Getting all the way there by the end of the day is admirable, and the lesson
of that goes a long way toward making up for the original mistake.

And while I'm handing out praise, good for President Klawe for calling out
Nadella on his answer and providing a better one. (She's been leading some
great changes at my alma mater, and this sort of thing has a lot to do with
why.)

------
forthefuture
You will never be able to move forward if the only possible reaction is
negativity. That's not a feeling people want to join in on.

------
zarriak
I don't understand the point of correcting him. If you see that the CEO of a
major tech company thinks this way, you shouldn't jump to correct him, we
should look at society as a whole and see how someone could arrive at that
conclusion. Asking a question about what a woman should do when she wants to
ask for a raise is a bad idea on a lot of levels. There are very significant
problems with gender and race in society, but asking a person who neither has
to ask for raises, nor is a woman is a bad idea. Creating questions based on a
problem like this is shortsighted, because this problem isn't going to be
solved on an individual basis.

------
serve_yay
As usual I expect the original story to far outlast this. Outrage is the order
of the day.

------
michaelochurch
Software's pseudo-meritocracy is especially tricky to navigate. It's hard for
everyone; it's even harder for women and minorities.

First, asking for "a raise" is generally going to lead to failure, and
complicate the relationship if not done properly. It sounds like you're asking
to get more money for the same work, and that'll leave anyone cold: especially
a middle-manager. An owner can (in theory) recognize your value and say,
"yeah, that number sounds about right" but, if you're asking a middle manager
for a raise, you're asking him to sit in a bunch of meetings and argue with
assholes on your behalf.

You're better off to ask for a _promotion_. But there are two problems with
that.

The first is that companies often give promotions (whether a title bump, or
actual increase of scope) _in lieu of raises_. "We don't have money in the
budget, but we'll certainly let you take on more responsibility _if you can
get your regular work done_ ". Of course, "if you can get your regular work
done" is code for, "we'll give you absolutely no support, and you won't be
able to delegate what's on your plate, so we're really just giving you
_permission_ to do higher-level work." Of course, these phony promotions
eventually lead a person to take the external mobility option.

The second issue is that asking for a promotion is often taken as more
confrontational than asking for a raise. You're implying, to your boss, that
he missed something. You're questioning his evaluation of you. Companies think
of themselves as perfect meritocracies and you make enemies if you challenge
that perception. And if you do so while acting on your own behalf, you look
like an entitled jerk.

The most effective way to get promoted (and, possibly, to get raises) is to
take on more responsibility without asking, hope that it's noticed and, if
not, to ask for formal promotion. (You should usually present this, to your
manager, as "We both know that titles are silly, but I've been doing a lot of
work with other departments, and having that credibility makes them more
willing to take my work and my needs seriously." Make it about the benefit to
him, not you.) However, taking on responsibility is risky as hell because it
usually means you're intruding coveted turf. (This isn't just "big company
politics"; you see it in tiny startups, as well. _Mad Men_ is set in small
companies and, after Season 3, in a startup.) Sometimes this pays off, but
often it backfires and leads to demotion ("allow me to clarify what is your
job and what is not your job") or termination. For reasons that are probably
cultural, it's clueless white men who are most eager to take on that risk.
Hence, they get promotions and raises faster, but also (presumably) get fired
more often.

~~~
hnal943
I think this is great advice. I don't think it supports your assertion that
this game is more difficult to play as a woman or a minority. If you claim
that "clueless white men" take more risk, and therefore end up on both
extremes (promoted or fired) more often, then they aren't privileged.

~~~
michaelochurch
_If you claim that "clueless white men" take more risk, and therefore end up
on both extremes (promoted or fired) more often, then they aren't privileged._

Most people who are privileged are white. There's definitely a
disproportionate representation. Most white people are not privileged, because
_most people_ are not privileged. People who talk about "white privilege" as
something extended to all whites haven't been in Appalachia recently.

Gender is much more complicated. There are overprivileged men and women, but
gender norms are the strongest at the bottom and top of society, while the
middle is most gender-egalitarian. That's why I have no problem making jokes
about "rich Daddies" and "trophy wives" when I lampoon the upper class (which
is not the same set of people as "the rich"). They actually _are_ deeply
sexist, so those depictions are pretty accurate. The result of this is that
the upper class directs overprivileged women to the fatuous (sitting on boards
of art galleries without understanding art, fashion, etc.) and overprivileged
men to positions of power.

~~~
gizmo
> Most white people are not privileged, because most people are not
> privileged.

This is a misrepresentation of what white privilege means. It means that _all
things equal_ being white gives you an unearned advantage in (western)
society. The same applies to gender-privilege, cis-privilege, wealth-
privilege, and so on. Our society would be better if we wouldn't give or deny
people opportunities based on those attributes.

All white people have white privilege, but a white person can obviously still
be less privileged than a person of color. You can argue that "most white
people are not privileged" because on an absolute privilege scale most white
people aren't all doing so great, but that still semantic nonsense for the
reason I give above. Nobody makes the ridiculous assertion that being white
automatically makes your life awesome, so to use white privilege like that is
a straw man. To put it simply: being white and poor in Appalachia sucks, but
being a poor minority in Appalachia sucks worse. Therefore white privilege.

