[jroseattle]

This is significant, and can be more so depending on the company and environment.

I've had my own team members tell me they aren't engaged, don't speak up in meetings, etc. because they are an introvert. Like it's a condition we must accommodate. Bullshit.

Communication is a skill. We value clear communication in our company. If you join our company, you may not be an expert in communication, but you will grow that skill.

An interview is a different scenario, but still -- you need to be able to communicate with me. If you can't, we will pass on you as a candidate.

[watwut]

"don't speak up in meetings"

People should speak in meetings when they have something to say. Not just so they speak - that just waste everybody time.

The more important point is that if 80% of people shut down while they are talking to someone, maybe has more to do with that someone then 80% of population being uncommunicative.

[jroseattle]

We're not quite that naive and clumsy. I'm the first one to make sure we keep discussion on-point and actively shutdown the monologuers of our team.

So let's clarify -- "speak up in a meeting" means when a senior person doesn't provide input at a time that would provide better direction, identify issues earlier in a process, etc. If you're a senior engineer, I need your input to ensure we're doing the right thing(s).

The forum of a group meeting isn't always in the wheelhouse of someone who freezes up when speaking in front of others. It's understandable -- I used to be one of those people. It can be out of your comfort zone, and doing so feels super-risky as well as plain frightening. It is still just a skill to be learned, no different than building muscles through exercise.

In our group, we talk a lot about trust and support. Everything we do is in the spirit of making each other stronger. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses -- share your strengths with the group, and build your weaknesses from the strength of others. It sounds pie-in-the-sky, but as the head of my group, I make sure we take this seriously.

So we don't have 80% of our group shutting down -- nobody talks over the top of anyone else, and we don't allow it. We need the input of the best of those, and sometimes that involves speaking up. If you're on my team and that notion makes you nervous, I understand. But as I've always explained to my team, we're going to help you build skills, and communicating is one of them.

[wolco]

If you want diversity you try to accommodate different personaility types. Otherwise you end up with a mono culture.

There is value in silence and limited communication.

[jroseattle]

Communication is a behavior and act, not a personality type. The suggestion here is that it's ok for someone who doesn't communicate well to be accommodated in the name of diversity. The notion of "poor communicator" as a personality type doesn't jive with me.

Replace "communication" with "data modeling" or "project management" or "reading". There are plenty who don't necessarily possess those skills.

Should we expect that others shouldn't develop skills in those areas (assuming they are important for their role) in the name of "diversity"?

[spoiler]

While I don't fully agree with the parent of your reply, I think they're right about communication being a skill. I am an introvert myself, but I've learned not to let that get in the way of me communicating with my colleagues or friends.

[dkersten]

Not speaking up in meetings doesn't mean they don't have this skill though. Some people (like me) don't like to add on-the-spot opinions on something, but prefer to go and mull it over, look into it etc before providing feedback. Doing it on the spot often leads to a lot of wasted time and overly long meetings. Meetings and other synchronous communications are, in my opinion, very wasteful and expensive.