What Sephora Knows About Women in Tech

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-sephora-knows-about-women-in-tech-that-silicon-valley-doesnt-1507539600

by Geekette • 9 years ago

33 80 9 years ago

TLDR:

the retailer has managed to attract technical women by recruiting with an eye toward candidates’ potential rather than specific skills
“Even if a female candidate doesn’t have all the requirements for a technical job, we want that person to come in and show what they can do,” says Yvette Nichols, the company’s vice president of talent.

They hire women without the regular qualifications and are willing to train them on the job, which is refreshing to see. It's a shame they only apply it to female candidates though.

At Sephora, Nida Mitchell, 29, got her chance to grow into a new role when she was promoted from web developer to IT project manager after two years at the company. The new job put her in charge of 14 male engineers, most of whom were at least 10 years her senior. She encountered roadblocks on one of the team’s first big projects, updating Sephora’s computing infrastructure ahead of the chain’s expansion to Brazil. “My first week, I had a one-on-one with my boss and said, ‘No one listens to me,’ ” Ms. Mitchell says.

She's concerned that within a single week of being promoted above 14 male engineers that they don't take her seriously when she comparatively has very little technical background (5 months with HTML and CSS) and no management experience (per her linkedin)? The issue here isn't that she's a woman.

It's cool that women in tech roles have found a home at Sephora. Something feels a little weird seeing them about bragging about the hiring process being exclusive to women though.

withoutclass• 9 years ago

Virtue signaling is all the rage. So is targeting equality of outcome over equality of opportunity.

WaxProlix• 9 years ago

Funny, I was just wondering who'd bring up the talking points about virtue signaling, which seem to be all the rage these days.

adjkant8• 9 years ago

Equal opportunity is reflective of the applicant pool given, which can kick the problem down to lower levels. The problem with women in tech is that seeing strong female role models will change the lower levels and society's conceptions, but it seems the only way to change those conceptions is to have them there in the first place.

There's plenty of people focused on early education, but I don't know if we're going to see those results for even as much as a decade, and the cultural problems in high school and college are still there too, even if we solve early education. This type of hiring is a positive step, not a perfect one.

All that said, it appears this tech team is not apples to apples with the roles of big SV firms it's being compared to, and I fully agree with other posters that other factors (such as the brand itself) are at play here. There are positive lessons to learn here still.

These types of policies are similar to affirmative action - they are trying to correct a problem at the symptom, not the source. While correcting the source is more important, and I understand why you have the objection to correcting the symptom, I think the effect is far more positive than negative. I don't expect you to be convinced by this or agree, but I think it's important to have the understanding behind why the policy is not applied uniformly, agreement or not. I think your categorization of "virtue signaling" is inaccurate here.

dang3• 9 years ago

So are generic ideological tangents, which the HN guidelines specifically ask people to avoid here because of their boring and diluting effect on discussion. Please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and please don't post like this here.

BearGoesChirp2• 9 years ago

They hire women without the regular qualifications and are willing to train them on the job, which is refreshing to see. It's a shame they only apply it to female candidates though.

I'm trying to imagine what would happen if a company decided to do the opposite of this. Hires men on what they might one day do, while hiring women only on what they do right now.

How is this not outright sex based discrimination?

whamlastxmas10• 9 years ago

It likely is from a legal perspective, but if you pressed them I'm sure they'd respond "Of course we treat all applicants the same". Demonstrating in court that you were discriminated against like this is difficult, and especially when it's a non-minority (some white man).

adjkant8• 9 years ago

See my comment below for more, but essentially it is like affirmative action. Simply reversing a constraint in a vacuum removes tons of other contexts. It's not X + Y = Z, there and many more variables at play. This action is trying to balance variables outside of the control of Sephora.

KirinDave3• 9 years ago

I'm trying to imagine what would happen if a company decided to do the opposite of this. Hires men on what they might one day do, while hiring women only on what they do right now.

Uh, it'd be what you see today. When they refer to "Qualifications" here they are referring to either university degrees or experience in top tier tech firms. And it'd be like the process that VCs engage in to hand out money to untested entrepreneurs. You'll get some Job's and you'll get some Duplants (or non-personally, you'll get some Apples and you'll get some Clinkles).

LOTS of people around you got into the industry without this background. It was in fact the norm. I mean ffs, man, Thiel was literally paying men he thought had potential to not finish college and work as EIRs for his private investments.

This practice is so common for men it's difficult to point to even one organization that doesn't have a man with at least one point on their CV where "they had an opportunity."

What's more, the entire landscape is changing faster than recruiters and folks setting "levels" for software engineers can keep up. Startups like Corusera and Udacity are literally making up new "credentials" out of thin air in an effort to bridge this, but the reality is that competitive edge of the junior position hiring market is a lot more about testing capability and potential more than any CV list.

And were the specter of "men not getting what they think they deserve" were not raised, HN would en masse be applauding Sephora for trying to build a sustainable technical organization that values training and internal employee development over 2-year re-employment cycles that give no one any incentive to learn.

Geekette2• 9 years ago

Managers in various companies routinely hire people including many men mainly on the basis of potential plus skills and other qualities vs on skills alone. The post talks about Sephora doing so with female candidates (per topic focus) but does not say it doesn't do the same with male candidates.

matt_wulfeck• 9 years ago

It’s weird to see them openly proclaim the bar is lower for women.

I think the bar should always be openly lower for less-represented demographics, and companies should make sure they provide the resources to train such individuals.

airza• 9 years ago

I don't know a lot of project managers who have deep technical experience.

mistermann4• 9 years ago

Being put in charge of 14 engineers each with 10+ years experience usually requires some experience in something. But then I guess that's literally what the article is about, that Sephora found away over this restrictive approach (moving the restrictions to a different attribute of course, but I digress).

rdtsc• 9 years ago

It's cool that women in tech roles have found a home at Sephora. Something feels a little weird seeing them about bragging about the hiring process being exclusive to women though

It's a fine line I think. I was in charge of recruiting before. Here are some observation and some things I did, some or many probably wrong:

* I'd try to bring more women onsite if I could. I justified it as giving them a another opportunity to prove themselves. Was it sexist to do it, I don't know. It maybe have been... The reason I did was that we were not a very diverse company. But I didn't do it to fulfill some generic diversity quota, so we can brag on Facebook about it or anything. It seemed to me that a diverse team would work better. There would be more strengths and perspectives. Same went for foreign candidates or people who are older and simply have more experience. I think it worked, we hired women who were very good, hard working and they met and exceed all the expectations. Aside from us spending a bit more resource on travel and time interviewing they still had to pass all the tests and interview steps. So I don't think we lowered the bar too much there.

* I found women were more reluctant to approach companies at college career fairs. Maybe it's sexist to say women are shy, so I might be stepping on some toes here. Sorry if it sounds that way. Not sure what to do there. One needs to be a bit aggressive and pushy in the context of how the interview works. Same applies to asking for raises and salary negotiations. Heck I am shy too. But when push comes to shove, I can at least pretend to be aggressive, but that might be hard for others.

* Not related to my personal interviewing experience, but in general, I wonder if women want to work in the tech field. Is it desirable profession at all? I am not so sure. We think this is an awesome career, we get to sit and solve cool problems, with cool technology, but maybe not everyone out there thinks that's so exciting. Programming pays relatively well compared to many professions out there, but again, maybe it's presumptuous to think that everyone out there will put money first above all and will want to maximize that element in their future career. I have the perspective of my wife for example, she really just wanted to be a mom and take care of the household. She graduated with the highest honors, but she's just not excited about being in her field, being at home and raising kids is what she enjoys. And yes, she has gotten criticism and negative remarks from "career" people about her "throwing her schooling and life away".

holograham• 9 years ago

the article doesnt mention this but I will ask ... does sephora attract more female candidates because it is a very popular makeup brand?

Or perhaps do they also get less male applicants because it is a female dominant brand?

"“Everyone spoke,” she says, “and felt comfortable offering opinions on anything from e-commerce to a shade of blush.”"

For me as a male I would not feel comfortable offering my opinions on a shade of blush. I am not offended by this -- I just have zero experience with blush.

Am I sexist because I wouldnt want to work there but also can see why women would be more successful there in tech-centric roles?

whamlastxmas10• 9 years ago

Their "tech team" includes the content producers/writers/managers/web marketing for their website, which I suspect is a sizable (if not majority) chunk. It's not really comparable to a software-heavy company having a 62% female tech team. So yes, it makes sense that having people who are traditionally much more interested in make up would be attracted to these positions.

fortythirteen• 9 years ago

I'd be interested to see how their dev team (split out from frontend/backend/fullstack) compares to the rest of the industry. I've worked at a lot of companies that were at least close to 50/50 if you counted all of marketing as "tech".

sever5• 9 years ago

The article says the company is already 74% female. If 62% female is more diverse than 50% just imagine how diverse a 100% female team would be. Diversity mathematics are tricky like that.

notyourwork2• 9 years ago

When I read this article my first thought was cool, great to see women in tech. Than my first question was what is their ratio of women to men in their application process and how does it compare to the industry ratio?

I suspect that because of the nature of their business less men apply compared to woman in relation to the industry average. As a person I apply to companies I am interested in and would not see myself applying to work at Sephora currently. I would see myself applying to mlb.tv for example since I like baseball.

edit: s/ration/ratio/

whamlastxmas10• 9 years ago

I'm a guy but I have a woman's name, I wonder if that would give me an advantage in the hiring process?

notyourwork2• 9 years ago

That is a really interesting thought. My wife, a R.N. has a male name and she wonders if she easily received interviews after graduation due to the same. There are few males in nursing.

mattmaroon• 9 years ago

My guess is men are actually overrepresented if 37% of their tech team is male. It seems highly unlikely male applicants would be that frequent.

whamlastxmas10• 9 years ago

Probably depends on a lot on where they advertise job openings.

yahna• 9 years ago

They didn't beat anyone, they just flipped men to the minority.

Good for them I guess.

jankotek• 9 years ago

From pictures (even on google search) this company seems white only. No people of color, muslim, LGBTQ+, disabled...

whamlastxmas10• 9 years ago

A common issue in corporate environments: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_tmHvZRKFMM/maxresdefault.jpg

Female-heavy workplaces to me have the connotation of being especially white.

ensignavenger• 9 years ago

How do you tell some one's religion, sexual orientation, or disability status from pictures?

yasserkaddour2• 9 years ago

The comparison to Apple, Facebook, Google and Amazon makes no sense. ASAIK Sephora is not a tech company, I found nothing made by them on GitHub. Can you think of any tech developed by Sephora?

sgslo• 9 years ago

Open source contribution does not indicate that is a company is or is not a 'tech company'.

yasserkaddour2• 9 years ago

Sure, but the best tech company do contribute to OSS, and this article specifically compare Sephora to those (software) company.

symlinkk6• 9 years ago

Managers say the retailer has managed to attract technical women by recruiting with an eye toward candidates’ potential rather than specific skills

Lmfao. So essentially what they're saying is a woman would be chosen over a more highly qualified man simply because she has a vagina.

How is this not sexism?

liquidise• 9 years ago

If men are given the same consideration of valuing future ability over immediate skills, then it would be equal hiring. If not, well, that is literally sexism.

That said, the perspective itself isn't foreign. It is my precise basis for hiring junior devs: i put a great deal more focus on a candidate's intellect and passion over current skills.

kenferry2• 9 years ago

I'm not sure how you're reading this to get that take away. Hiring for potential is what you want to do – what matters is what someone _will_ do, not what they've done in the past. Obviously past accomplishments are an indicator.

symlinkk6• 9 years ago

Because they say they've managed to attract WOMEN this way, instead of PEOPLE. To me this implies that they judge men differently, in order to fulfill their bullshit gender quota.

whamlastxmas10• 9 years ago

In other parts of the article they specify that they look at "women" this way. It's implicit.

throwawayknecht3• 9 years ago

So essentially what they're saying is a woman would be chosen over a more highly qualified man simply because she has a vagina.

I don't have any personal experience, but I've heard many women without vaginas talk about how good Sephora has been to/for them. So don't worry, that's not happening.

microcolonel3• 9 years ago

Step 1: Be a famous cosmetics retail company.

Step 2: Consider more of your employees to be on the "tech team" than other firms do.

Step 3: Lower the recruiting bar for one sex and not the other, potentially in contravention of the law.

Just another corporate circle jerk.

ksk• 9 years ago

What is the definition of winning here?

chmod775• 9 years ago

They do realize that once you pass 50% females you actually start to become less diverse, right?

With 74% females they are as diverse as a 26% female company. I'm positive that's pretty damn far from setting any diversity records.

rmk• 9 years ago

The article seems to rely on a lot of people who no longer work at Sephora:

Jenna Melendez

Terre Layton

Asheley Linnenbach

Nida Mitchell

At Sephora (not clear from the article, but assume so):

Mary Beth Laughton

Yvette Nichols

Also very weird, not a single programmer (female or otherwise) at Sephora is quoted in the article. The only possible exception is Layton, who had an 'engineering background' but was Product Manager at Sephora.

This article does not show anything concrete about whether Sephora actually has a large percentage of female programmers, devops, or sysadmins. Neither does it say what concrete steps they took to increase the percentage (final count: 62%, but it's not at all clear from the article whether that number is limited to people who actually program or tend to programs).

The article is complete garbage, and not worthy of HN. It does not elevate or even contribute to the discussion over female participation in software development in any way.

whamlastxmas10• 9 years ago

The state of most journalism these days is sad. When they so often get it so wrong in the categories I know a lot about, it makes me feel like they get it wrong in all the categories all the time.

tjalfi• 9 years ago

Michael Crichton called this the Gell-Mann amnesia effect[0].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5203871

koiz• 9 years ago

"How Sephora used sexism to achieve a 60% female tech team"

Seriously this screams of sexism but what I'm most troubled about is hiring inexperienced people and putting them in charge of seasoned teams. I've seen* too many attempts at this and it rarely works.

synicalx• 9 years ago

How is deliberate over-representation of a particular gender "diversity"? Is this over-representation what we're trying to fix with "diversity"?

jacknews• 9 years ago

"At Sephora, Nida Mitchell, 29, got her chance to grow into a new role when she was promoted from web developer to IT project manager after two years at the company. The new job put her in charge of 14 male engineers"

How are they defining "tech role" exactly, is it that most of the developers are male, but "tech sales", "tech marketing", "tech product management", "tech PM" roles are female?

Is this merely a case of a company run by women, with a bias toward hiring and promoting women?

That's perhaps not unlike other companies run by men, so I guess it balances, but it's hardly a new model that everyone should emulate.

What Sephora Knows About Women in Tech

Related Stories