
Asian Americans are the least likely in the US to be promoted to management - yarapavan
https://hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely-group-in-the-u-s-to-be-promoted-to-management
======
serping1
In my experience executives win their positions by...

(A) being a founding member of the company and accepting high amounts of risk

(B) founding and then selling a company to another company and winning the
executive role that way

(C) (the standard way) grinding it out for a very long time in an internal
role

(D) being recognized and promoted very soon by an illuminated management that
rapidly understands they are very high potential

(E) perhaps to appease an investor, family member or some other politically
driven choice to give that person some inflated title

The reason Silicon Valley imports so many Asian workers is that they are
deliberately selecting for obedience, Visa / immigrant indentured servents or
want mindless crank turners to do some job no one else wants (here, maintain
this sharepoint server for the next ten years) and be not expected to go
anywhere.

Let’s say you are a hiring manager and you have the following two choices:

(A) independent, agressive and creative employee who may argue with you, leave
if you piss them off and generally do only a mixture of what you want them to
do and what they feel like doing

(B) Someone who will simply do what they are told and never, ever argue or
leave

Many hiring managers select for B in my experience. These are weak managers
but they are very common.

This may predispose the characteristics of Asian workers imported into the
valley to be the non entrepreneurial ones.

To be an executive you have to take risks, you have to take stands, you have
to be agressive. A visa worker cannot do these things out of fear.

~~~
rufflez
Umm... the article refers to Asian Americans. Do they need a visa to work in
their own country?

------
badrabbit
The higher up you go the more you need connectiond and informal relationships
to progress.what I have seen so far in corporate america tells me a lot of
people(especially older ones) still make friends based on ethnicity and
gender. Of course I am only stating my subjective perception.

They should audit application of meritocracy and use apparent lack of
diversity only as a potential symptom not as the illness that needs curing
(unless promotions shouldn't happen based on merit?). Like, "who applied for
this internal position and who had the best objective merit?"

~~~
coldtea
> _what I have seen so far in corporate america tells me a lot of
> people(especially older ones) still make friends based on ethnicity and
> gender_

Corporate America? This is in all kinds of America (and probably all over the
world). From statistics I've read (don't have the link now), the average white
person for example has much less black friends and acquaintances that would be
representative by percentage of population in their area. And vice versa of
course. Same for men having male vs female friends (and, again, vice versa).

We're social animals, but we prefer to associate with people similar to us --
and even when it comes to arts, and media preferences and hobbies and so on,
gender and ethnicity play a role.

And of course there's the demographics: there are very clear white and black
neighbourhoods for example -- this obviously extends to the social circle,
e.g. neighbourhoods, other kids you know, etc. That said, severals programs to
"fix" this, like busing and forced breakups of communities, didn't work.

[http://prospect.org/article/moving-hood-mixed-success-
integr...](http://prospect.org/article/moving-hood-mixed-success-integrating-
suburbia)

[https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/feb/21/racial-
segrega...](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/feb/21/racial-segregation-
in-america-causes)

[https://www.brookings.edu/articles/welcome-neighbors-new-
evi...](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/welcome-neighbors-new-evidence-on-
the-possibility-of-stable-racial-integration/)

~~~
badrabbit
Not everyone is like that. Shared beliefs and common goals are a lot of times
more important but people still see each other as different even though they
were born in the same hospitals and went to the same schools and sports events
all their lives due to appearances. People distrust different especially when
the stakes are high.

------
raverbashing
I love how, usually for "politically correct" reasons, the term Asian is used
(usually as a cop out) to refer to several different cultures and ethnicities.

This is the biggest continent on Earth after all.

~~~
mattlondon
Yes I always thought this is weird. For me in the UK, "Asian" always referred
to (for better or worse) Indian, Pakistani, and Bengali up until somewhere in
the mid-2000s I think (??) when I was told by someone that "The O-word" is a
racist term (I am starting to sound like my grandparents here!)

Sorry to anyone I offended up until then.

I'd prefer it if we just dumped this concept of needing to put everyone into a
generalised named-group anyway. I am just me, regardless of my
gender/ethnicity/age/favourite ice cream flavour/sexuality/politics. Articles
pointing out how "my" group are failing at this or over-represented at that or
that it is official "Named-Group Month" are not helpful in my opinion - they
just serve to divide and highlight differences between people. We need to
treat everyone equally by rooting out bias (conscious or otherwise) and I dont
think this sort of thing helps us to reach that goal.

~~~
gambiting
I'm genuinely curious - what's the "o-word"? Orient? How is that racist?
English is not my first language and I have never came across Orient being
used in a derogatory or offensive way - unless of course there's some other
word I don't know about.

~~~
dagw
Referring to the region as the "Orient" isn't really a problematic term, even
if it might be seen as a bit archaic. But using the term "oriental" to refer
to the people from that region does have a disparaging and pejorative history
in American English usage. Outside of the US the term is considered less
disparaging and more just considered archaic.

~~~
mattlondon
In the UK it has been considered racist for a while I believe. At least that
is what I have been led to believe.

I am not sure who "decides" (presumably the people who are called by that
name) when this happens, but there was a distinct point for me (although I
cant remember precisely when that was) where I was informed that I cant use
that term any more.

Bit of a shock to be politely told by someone, when up until that point you
had no idea. You feel bad - you had no idea.

------
GreeniFi
I found this genuinely surprising and saddening. Genuinely, some of the most
simultaneous competent, friendly and amusing colleagues I have had were Asian.
One possible suggestion: do characteristics which signal confidence and
competence vary across US and Asian management cultures? Do Asian managers
downplay their strengths because of Asian cultural norms?

~~~
alfredallan1
You’re starting to touch the issue, but IMO, not quite. Allow me to present a
somewhat controversial approach.

Considering the US only: at the risk of extreme and borderline stereotypical
generalizations - if one looks at the history of immigration into the country
- the Asian immigrants have largely consisted of Chinese laborers around the
gold rush, Indian truck drivers and motel/cornershop owners in the early - mid
1900’s. They came to make a living in somewhat decent conditions. Both lines
of work require you to be reasonably honest, keep your head down and do the
job. It can be presumed these were the values these Asian parents inculcated
into their children - who saw the pathway to their version of the American
dream as a relatively low risk SME. The Asian immigrants since the 1960s have
been largely STEM people - academic high performers, given the nature of
university admissions and the visa process. STEM high performers - as
individuals, and presumably as parents too, tend to be intelligent but
sensible (risk-rational), belive in very hard work, tend not to oversocialize,
to not brag a whole lot, and tend to prioritize knowledge/lifestyle over blind
ambition and obscene wealth. None of those traits are directly conducive to
being a top exec, but rather to a job like VP - engg.

An excellent case in point - as another commenter also mentioned, if you go to
Asian cities, you’ll find exactly the sort of “persona” you’d find in a
typical Western exec, often exaggerated to an even higher level. But that
persona hasn’t made it to US shores, instead choosing to make it big in their
own place.

In contrast, many of the earliest “white” immigrants came here first for
ideological reasons, and later driven by ambitions of striking it big, and
often by delusions of grandeur, and were significantly less risk-averse than
either groups of Asian immigrants I mentioned earlier. Of course there were
plenty of regular folks too.

So I would submit that instead of looking at just Asians/whites making it to
top exec, one should look at 1) professional backgrounds of the parents of top
execs, 2) fraction of those with highest academic/test scores making it to top
exec. Of course, to be a successful top exec, the need for “top” academic
scores is outweighed by a host of other qualifications. Asians in whom these
“other” qualifications are found in ample measure often do make it big in
their home countries, but might make terrible immigrants to the US.

~~~
azs114
This is the problem. You assume the situation is justified and try to find an
explanation for it. Would you submit this kind of theories if the article is
talking about any other groups?

~~~
alfredallan1
You’re conflating two different things - 1) justification and 2) explanation,
and with that misinterpreting the gist of my post.

Just because it has a valid explanation doesn’t mean it is just, nor that it
should continue. I was trying to give one possible background for why things
are they way they are - not the way they should be.

The situation is starting to change, but it simply cannot happen overnight,
the best case scenario for sustainable change is a couple of generations of
sustained effort from all sides. Look at how the Italian and Irish immigrants
went from pariahs to normal. The Chinese have gone from manual labor to solid
middle class in 2-3 generations.

And I’d be happy to submit whatever kind of explanation I think might fit the
facts of any situation, regardless of group.

------
quantisan
The change in headline from the original article is misleading. The article
gives data that Asian American are under-represented in management across a
few professional fields, but do not (nor does it promise to) go into
explaining why that's happening. :\

------
holdenc
More interesting, I believe, is the question: why do so many Indians advance
to the executive level relative to East Asians, when both are similarly famous
for academic excellence and strict upbringing?

------
ulfw
Microsoft CEO is Indian. As is Google and Adobe’s. As are Nokia and Global
Foundries and Pepsi and MasterCard and Deloitte and SanDisk and and and.
Nvidia CEO and founder is Taiwanese. It’s not like those are small players

~~~
sakarisson
You can find examples of executives of all races, religions and sexualities.
The article points out that Asian Americans are less likely to rise to exec
level, not that they literally don't do it at all.

------
jlebrech
in other news engineers don't want to be promoted to management.

also
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbert_principle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbert_principle)

------
erie
There is a strange yet important issue with some people who will never advance
to Exec level due to childhood experiences with abuse. Extremely serious
trauma could be detected by Hogan tests that are used by many companies for
Exec candidates. Such Trauma would make people break down in stressful
situations.

------
Annatar
As long as someone finds it necessary to discriminate between any humans (for
example “Afroamerican”, “Asian”, “Hispanic”, “White”), instead of treating
them all as humans, you will not get rid of discrimination, because by
definition, to start naming groups is to discriminate. The very verb to
discriminate is a synonym for distinguish.

~~~
icebraining
Discriminate is used with multiple definitions; here it's being used as a
synonym for "discriminate _against_ ".

~~~
b6
Is it possible to only discriminate _in favor_ of some group without
discriminating against some other group?

~~~
icebraining
No, but it's possible to discriminate without being in favor or against, if
you use the definition given by Annatar (ie, distinguish).

------
kuwze
And they didn’t even mention how underrepresented they are in politics.

~~~
legostormtroopr
Also, why are African people underrepresented in Asian politics?

~~~
kuwze
According to Google the percentage of the population that is African-American
is 12.3%, whereas Asians make up only 5.6 percent of the population.

So I guess I didn't do my research.

------
_pmf_
Well, someone has do do the hard work.

------
jaseemabid
Does Asian include Indians as well? Kind of amusing since Apple and Google are
both lead by "asian" immigrant men.

~~~
kanox
India and China each have a billion people but the article can't find a
politically correct way to distinguish between them.

Or a more serious explanation is that there is little data here because
surveys lump "asians" together.

------
thisisit
How close are Harvard Business Review and Harvard, the university? Because
timing of this article is odd with Harvard, the University is being sued for
discriminating against Asian candidates.

And the article's conclusion calling out for more work towards inclusion of
Asian Americans in management workforce seems a bit apologetic. But maybe I am
wrong and reading this incorrectly.

~~~
tux_warrior
You are absolutely correct, there have been lots of news reports[1] about the
partiality against Asians in the university, and this is most likely a PR
exercise to counter that.

[1] [http://www.newsweek.com/harvard-
opinion-990958](http://www.newsweek.com/harvard-opinion-990958)

~~~
drawnwren
It seems highly unlikely that Harvard University would risk getting the entire
organization involved in a lawsuit dealing specifically with Harvard College
admissions.

------
tux_warrior
Another reason for Asians not advancing along the career ladder is that most
of them are down-to-earth and not interested in flaunting money. Most are
content with earning enough to make a livelihood with comforts, luxuries isn't
what most of them care about. Again, I know this is probably the
characteristic of most people in general, not just Asians. I just feel that
Asians with this nature are more in number than westerners.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
I'm not convinced. I mean, look at any of the big Asian cities and you'll find
endless examples of flaunted wealth.

~~~
tux_warrior
It appears that way because:

1\. Those who flaunt are in the minority, but make the most impact. You are
looking at endless flaunted wealth in few cities like Mumbai and Bangalore,
but not at the infinite villages in states like Maharashtra, MP, UP, Bihar,
etc. where most people still struggle to make a livelihood.

2\. Its easy to flaunt wealth in India than more developed countries because
of ills like corruption, illiteracy, lack of social media and awareness, etc.
If an American flaunts wealth, probably he/she will easily catch the attention
of social media and the FBI/IRS/etc. But in India, nobody cares and the
institutions are quite corrupt and easily bend to the will of the rich and
wealthy.

------
b6
This is a harmful way of thinking, unfortunately on the rise lately.
Ostensibly to promote fairness and diversity, it encourages us to think _more_
about arbitrary racial categories, hereditary traits, disabilities, etc. Those
things about people we were starting to consider less and less significant, we
are being encouraged instead to be hyper-aware of.

Whoever decides the categories has the power to decide whether your
organization is compliant. For example, suppose by a miracle that your
organization is "correctly diverse" with regard to some set of blessed ethnic
groups, hereditary traits, disabilities, etc. Well, your organization is
almost certainly not compliant with regard to the left-handed, those who can
roll their tongues, those with connected earlobes, those with flat feet, etc.
Maybe you have the "correct" number of black people, but do you have the
correct number of gay black people? Do you have the correct number of gay
black women? How do you feel about sexual orientation or autism being blessed
categories, but not, say, albinism, hyperhidrosis, or Marfan syndrome?

As a practical matter, how do you suppose someone would show that they were,
say, partly descended from Native Americans? Certificate from a genetics
testing lab? Are we going to carry cards in our wallets?

That's not the future I want. Your body is not the important part of you. The
important part of you is your mind. I won't help build a hyper-body-focused
society.

In the future I envision, nobody cares about anybody's supposed ethnicity.
Nobody keeps spreadsheets about it. Nobody specifically considers body
attributes during college admissions, or hiring decisions, or really, ever,
because it's just not important. Let's not support any efforts to make these
things _more_ important.

~~~
philbarr
Whilst you're correct that we shouldn't be worrying about body attributes at
all, and I agree with your vision of the future, we still need a way to get
from where we are _now_ to where we want to be.

In the meantime the best we've got is to try and make sure we've got some
evidence of diversity.

~~~
b6
> we still need a way to get from where we are now to where we want to be.

It has been happening already. It's as if we've been gradually smoking less
and less, and then a movement comes along that tells us that in order to quit,
we actually need to smoke _more_ for the foreseeable future.

~~~
pwinnski
>> we still need a way to get from where we are now to where we want to be.

>It has been happening already.

Citation needed. I think evidence suggests that we've been getting from where
we have been to where we want to be precisely _because_ of these kinds of
efforts, and the pushback against these efforts has been there at every step
of the way.

