[whynotminot]

I feel like there’s already HR processes in place for someone who is creating a hostile workplace?

I prefer my yearly company expectations to be quantifiable with clear metrics.

And instead this is the kind of squishy question that eludes any kind of reasonable metric. And worse, its vagueness could lead to misunderstanding. And even worse, misunderstanding the question in any dimension seems like it could have actual repercussions.

Some commenters have said it’s as simple as being inclusive of dietary restrictions. Ok cool easy enough. Is that actually in a rubric?

What if I have a manager that thinks it means I should run in the annual LGBTQ+ 5K? Ok I’m willing to do that, I like to run and support those causes. But is that expectation written anywhere?

In short, I don’t think these kind of questions are ever as simple as “just don’t be a douchebag.”

[red-iron-pine]

> But is that expectation written anywhere?

in many of the F500 orgs I've worked at -- yes it is. unambiguously so.

diversity / inclusion / team building activities were explicitly called out as part of yearly goals and performance review metrics.

things like go to a women-in-tech event and just listen, or a black history month discussion, read a book about homelessness and minority communities, etc. I went on a postmodern literature spree and ended up reading a bunch of african and middle eastern authors and that qualified for the perf review.

the "LBGTQ 5k" is a laughably bad strawman and would never be required for a bunch of reasons.

[whynotminot]

You guys must really hate running (and love missing the point). It wasn't even intended to be a "bad straw man" -- I literally would be fine running a 5K. If it was a documented example of a way I could meet their expectations for creating an inclusive environment, I would totally run a 5K themed around one of the company-approved causes. Might even lead up a whole group of us from the company to run in it together.

The point was: Do they have actual documented examples of what they want from me when they put this on my performance review:

> What impact did your actions have in contributing to a more diverse and inclusive Microsoft?

I am glad your companies have given you documented examples of what they have wanted in this arena. I'm sure that helped make it easier for you to meet their expectations and avoid any potentially awkward confusion.

[tedivm]

There's a difference between "inclusive" and "not hostile".

It's weird that you're making up scenarios that would obviously never happen like the 5k thing.

[whynotminot]

It’s weird to have vague, non-business expectations built into a yearly performance review.

If you can give me some more examples I’m happy to hear them.

So far, commentators have listed:

(1) dietary considerations for team meals. (2) participation in company ERGs (this has never been compulsory at any company I’ve worked at). (3) making up a series of words they hope will appease managers

None of this seems like it should be part of a yearly performance package?

Personally, if I had celiacs and found out people were using ordering me a gluten-free pizza as a critical input to their yearly performance reviews, I’d probably be a little weirded out. But then maybe I’d be one of the more popular folks in the office come lunch-and-learn day, so pros and cons I guess.

[magicalist]

> I prefer my yearly company expectations to be quantifiable with clear metrics.

lol, yes, annual tech perf reviews. Known for clear and quantifiable metrics that are in no way based on squishy realities.

[whynotminot]

True it’s all kind of hand wavy at the end of the day for a lot of this performance review stuff.

This just seems to be especially hand-wavy, with an additional whiff of ideological litmus testing thrown on, which could go sideways in more problematic ways than “this year I reduced the frontend bundle size by 25%”