ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: User Culture or Management (was Re: IETF Diversity Question on Berlin Registration?)

2013-04-30 00:20:09
retransmited (not received at IETF or published)

On 4/29/13, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi Mike,

(sorry for my long message, will try to improve)

I like the concept and reasoning of your message, and would like to
add, is there other reasons for the results and conclusion your
message got to? Is there something we can fix in the ietf-culture or
ietf-procedures to make the diversity more established? I think that
female managers/leaders are important to any world-organisation to get
successful, and to be specific, I will recommend all world NPOs
(Non-Profit Org.) need gender diversity (male or female, which one may
be minority) at *least* 10-20 percent of management teams. An NPO with
all male or all female management is not successful for the world of
diverse *gender* and *users*. Management skills if gender-diversed
will reflect better community involvement, choices, culture, and
decisions.

 IMHO, Organisation Management objectives are to make 1) *users*
increase in numbers, 2) increase in diverse, and 3) increase in
satisfaction. If only present/current users select the management
there is no dought that their decisions reflect users-culture and
awareness, but do they increase the three objectives.

My concerns in the diversity issue is to focus on the diversity of
*management-gender* and *ietf-users* to benefit future decisions and
make *awareness* into the ietf-culture. Your message discussed both
but for the diversity of ietf-users not in similar depth compared with
gender, which I think you may help me understand/evaluate its diverse
in ietf.

Regards,
AB

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: Michael StJohns <mstjohns at comcast.net>
To: Margaret Wasserman <mrw at lilacglade.org>,t.p. <daedulus at
btconnect.com>
Cc: ietf at ietf.org
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 00:05:37 -0400

Let's consider for a moment that this may not actually be the correct
question.  Instead, consider "Why the diversity of the IETF leadership
doesn't reflect the diversity of the set of the IETF WG chairs"?  I
believe this is a more representative candidate population for the IAB and
IESG.

By my count (using the WG chairs picture page), there are 202 current
working group chairs. Of these 15 are female  - or 7.4% of the
population [It would be more reliable to do this for any WG chair in
the last 5-10 years, but the above was readily available and I think
provides at least the basis for discussion.  Anticipating the
argument, I would assume for the sake of discussion a fairly similar
percentage of ex-working group chairs per gender unless there is
evidence to the contrary]

There are 14 (current area directors plus the chair) members of the
IESG, of which none are currently female.

There are 12 current IAB members of which 1 member is female.

Assuming perfect distribution, that would suggest that 14 * (15/202)
or 1.03 IESG members should be female.

Assuming perfect distribution, that would suggest that 12 * (15/202)
or .89 IAB members should be female.

Assuming perfect distribution, that would suggest that 26 * (15/202)
or 1.93 IAB + IESG members should be female.

And pretending for a moment that picks for the IAB and IESG are
completely random from the candidate set of Working group chairs, the
binomial distribution for 7.4% for 27 positions is:

0 - 12.5%, 1 - 27.0%, 2 - 28.1%, 3 or more - 32.5%.  (e.g. about 40%
of the time, the IAB and IESG  combined will have 0 or 1 female
members).

for 7.4% for 15 positions  (IESG) is:
0 - 31.4%, 1 - 37.8%, 2 - 21.2%, 3 or more - 9.5%

for 7.4% for 12 positions (IAB) is:
0 - 39.6%, 1 - 38.1%, 2 - 16.8%, 3 or more - 5.4%


But the actual one you should consider is 7.4% for 14 positions
(annual replacement):
0 - 34%, 1 - 38.1%, 2 - 19.9%, 3 or more - 8%.

This last one says that for any given nomcom selection, assuming
strict random selection, 72% of the time 0 or 1 females will be
selected across both the IAB and IESG.  You should use this one as the
actual compositions of the IAB/IESG are the sum of all the nomcom
actions that have happened before.

There are statistical tests to determine whether there is a
statistically significant difference in populations, but my admittedly
ancient memories of statistics suggest that the population size of the
IAB/IESG is too small for a statistically valid comparison with either
the WG chair population or the IETF population.

Of course, the nomcom doesn't select and the confirming bodies do not
confirm based on a roll of the dice.
But looking at this analysis, it's unclear - for this one axis of
gender - that the question "why the diversity of the IETF leadership
does not reflect the diversity of the set of IETF WG chairs" has a
more correct answer than "the luck of the draw".

My base premise may be incorrect:  That you need to have been a WG
chair prior to service as an IAB or IESG member.  I hope it isn't as I
think this level of expertise is useful for success in these bodies.

Assuming it is correct, then the next question is whether or not there
is a significant difference in percentage of female attendees vs
percentage of female working group chairs and is there a root cause
for that difference that the IETF can address in a useful manner.

Mike


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: User Culture or Management (was Re: IETF Diversity Question on Berlin Registration?), Abdussalam Baryun <=