From the Huffington Post Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/25/work-words_n_5159868.html?utm_hp_ref=business&ir=Business When we replace a specific task with a vague expression, we grant the task more magnitude than it deserves. If we don't describe an activity plainly, it seems less like an easily achievable goal and more like a cloudy state of existence that fills unknowable amounts of time. A fog of fast and empty language has seeped into the workplace. I say it's time we air it out, making room for simple, concrete words, and, therefore, more deliberate actions. By striking the following 26 words from your speech, I think you'll find that you're not quite as overwhelmed as you thought you were. Count the number that LLNLs mangers use. touch base circle back bandwidth - impactful - utilize - table the discussion deep dive - engagement - viral value-add - one-sheet deliverable - work product - incentivise - take it to the ...
Comments
The questions are like " Do you feel you have been unfairly denied a promotion" which find that 50% of women say yes. Did they ask the same question to men? If it is also 50%? Almost all the questions have this same issue.
These Pew research studies are either poorly done or have an agenda.
"Now ask men if they have ever been denied a promotion because they are male. Apples and oranges 7:29 AM.
2/20/2020 1:24 PM"
No it is not because you have to assume why you where denied a promotion. The question is do you feel you where unfairly denied a promotion and 50% said yes, and some assumed that it was because they are women but they actually do not know. Now they should also ask the men the same questions suppose they get 50% of men said yes. You could also ask why and they can only assume certain reasons but again they do not know. Look this is not that hard to understand, you need some kind of control when you do these kinds of studies. This is one of the reasons for the so called "reproducibility crisis" that is so prevalent in social sciences.
An agenda? Perhaps, but agendas are not limited to diversity research studies. There is not much that is organic about diversity and inclusiveness at the Labs. To a large degree, Lab diversity efforts are a construct required of federal contractors and are monitored by the OFCCP. Annually, the Labs generate diversity reports, recommendations, and goals called an Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) which are examined by the OFCCP, not an option for the Labs. The AAP has Lab support as noted by the plethora of Lab management signatures. Lab minorities who had voiced their own discrimination concerns are often promoted to diversity managers and become the point of contact for OFCCP encounters. As to the past diversity concerns of newly promoted diversity managers, those were just misunderstandings taken out of context you see. Use caution with the word agenda because there is plenty to go around.
How would women or men know the reasons they where denied a promotion? They just have to take guess as to why. By the how many did they ask? I think you would need at least 500 people of either gender to proper statistics. How where the questions asked, where they leading questions act. Pew research is generally very low quality in terms of actual statistics and analysis. This may be deliberate to get the narrative they want.