Asian American culture leads to personalities which are not considered leadership-worthy in WASP culture. You're not alone there. The same is true for people from most cultures -- African immigrants, Eastern European immigrants, and most other types of immigrants behave in ways which are too foreign.
It's not universal -- there are individuals who manage to culturally adapt. But they're a minority, and it's an uphill battle.
Actual performance tends to be excellent, but that's not how leaders get chosen in most organizations. Leadership decisions are almost entirely about perception: Do your employees like you and relate well to you? Your superiors? That has a huge cultural component, and a lot of room for racism.
His master chief was black, his executive officer was a woman, and his head programmer was white. He was universally loved in the Navy community, especially by his subordinates, and though he did ruffle some feathers with his superiors, I can't believe he pissed them off too much, since they even honored him with a full page cartoon of him explaining his achievement with two other O6s and an O5, and twice with the legion of merit, which you don't get (much less twice) if the admirals are displeased.
For whatever it's worth, I detected no assumption that your father was an immigrant in the OP. It's worth dwelling on the possibility that no such assumption is needed.
Following up Asian American with a list of other immigrant groups indicates that assumption pretty strongly. If he wanted to highlight cultural differences from WASP society, he could have listed Black Americans or Southern Rednecks. It's quite clear that Blacks and Redneck society, despite being very different from WASP society, is "native" to America in a way that Asian Americans aren't in public perception.
The two groups you list face more discrimination than most Asians precisely because of the assumption you list: they're perceived to be native, and cultural allowances aren't made, but the cultural differences are huge.
That's especially true for what you call "Southern Rednecks," of whom you will find approximately zero at e.g. elite schools, mostly due to this sort of discrimination.
It is also possible that his leadership ability did not manifest equally in both settings, for example if he was more passionate about the military than his civilian job and/or if it was a better fit for his skill set.
Not to suggest that some institutions don't still discriminate against Asians etc, unfortunately. Hopefully things are changing for the better though.
It's called "team chemistry" not "team logic" for a reason.
I am a long way from any of those places.
On the face of it, there is no way to tell if this is the actual cause of a phenomenon or merely a rationalization for an irrational bias.
One might invoke Occam's razor at this point, and say that the simplest explanation - that it is the actual cause, not a rationalization for something else - is the most probable one, but:
"The same is true for people from most cultures -- African immigrants, Eastern European immigrants, and most other types of immigrants behave in ways which are too foreign."
- the more one advances this point, the more clearly it becomes obvious that foreign-ness is the one common factor in all the cases.
Based on your last paragraph, I think we are both making essentially the same point.
It’s common for people to adopt a persona for climbing the corporate ladder, because it works. Looking at people from any racial or ethnic background who succeed and you find they fit the organization they climbed. Not all US companies fit the corporate MBA mold, but it’s extremely common and tends to take over most companies as they age or grow.
I am not saying that’s a good thing, but learning the rules of the game are a basic prerequisite for winning.
If 10x more people of type X than type Y play the game and people of type X make it to he top 10x more frequently then that’s in line with this model. Currently there are for example 4 black CEO’s of Fortune 500 companies, which is really low.
But, if the proxy is say MBA graduates in 1990, that’s also low. Family connections further muddle the water etc. It’s clearly not a level playing field by any means.
One could argue that the problem is at root with the American? Western? structural bias in favor of extroversion and assertiveness, but you need de-mystify the dynamics involved in the first place to make that case clearly.
Except that the post I am replying to is not just about Indian inmmigrants, and, as I specifically make a point of, says the same about quite a wide range of origins.
> I invite you to go find it.
If you can't be bothered to support your case, I can't be bothered to do so for you - especially as I suspect that it is beside the point.
I think you misjudge my aims in posting.
That's discriminatory, but different in how it plays out than discrimination on skin color.
If I receive a resume from an equally-qualified Nigerian and an equally-qualified American of Anglo-Saxon descent, unless the Nigerian was able to seamlessly code-shift, the language WILL be subtly or significantly different. Unless you make explicit cultural allowances for that, that WILL bias me towards the individual of Anglo-Saxon descent.
In general, even within groups you’ll have bias whether it’s conscious or not, irrespective of race. An American-born person of Indian decent would potentially be more likely to get hired than a white Australian.
I think you can explain a lot of this without dancing around racism without saying it. Do you not think the same thing happens in every other country on the planet? If we think through what you’ve written here, even differences between groups of WASP will prove out a bias. Maybe it’s education level, or someone uses a word that my favorite football coach uses (and they like it too since we are from a more similar background) etc.
Was your expectation that this doesn’t play out elsewhere? Do you think the same thing wouldn’t happen in Tokyo, or Toronto?
But that doesn't mean it's good. OP ought to be able to find a job based on their skills, not based on their culture. And people should have enough cross-cultural competency to be able to adapt to a manager or employee with a subtly or significantly different cultural background.
It's especially not good in America, which has an identity as a melding pot, and where most people are either immigrant or of immigrant descent of some sort (except those whose ancestors crossed over the Bering Straight).
As a footnote, every single one of my comments in this thread was "cancelled" (many downvotes, without any constructive comments, most likely by someone with multiple accounts or with bots). The ones which were +4 are now down too. I don't really care about up/down-votes, but it's a growing problem on HN. At some point, it will become reddit.
At what point do you get diminishing returns on focusing on reducing bias, or at one point do you actually make things worse for the sake of eliminating bias? I'd argue if you eliminate all bias, you'd eliminate any variation in culture.
I agree with you that you should be able to find a job based on your skills, and others should be able to tolerate your culture, but I think a lot of the action around this is extremely superficial and not well-thought. Believe it or not, I actually find that I have less cultural navigation working with Indian engineers than I do with religious white people in the United States. I don't think this whole thing is so focused on WASP - vs others, and spending so much time on it is quite shallow. People who focus on that so much I think, largely, haven't been exposed to much of the world.
I also think that focusing on the United States as a nation of immigrants is kind of weak. In a global society I think we need to apply these standards everywhere. Brasil is a nation of immigrants, too. Should only the United States focus on reducing bias because it's "a nation of immigrants"? Why shouldn't Japan focus on this? Russia? Ethiopia?
For the record, I'm responding you with some of my own real thoughts here and not trying to "cancel" anything. I don't believe in that. :)
1) Diverse people come at problems from different directions. That's not just cultural diversity, but all kinds of diversity. The best-run businesses have cross-disciplinary, cross-cultural, cross-cutting teams.
2) Diverse teams understand markets better. Most Silicon Valley startups are focused on the same demographics: Wealthy, liberal Americans. A lot of other groups, both within the US and outside, form huge markets which are underserved, and business opportunities.
I've been in cross-cultural organizations, and it can work really well.
And yes, just as with your experience, I do find a lot less cultural adaptation working with immigrants (not just "Indian engineers") than with locals from cultures other than my own (not just "religious white people in the United States"). Immigrants are in a different culture, and already making cultural adaptations. They overlook a lot of irrelevant stuff, and when they do react, it's for things less subtle.
Working across cultures when people look like you, and expect you to behave like them is a lot harder. And in many cases, the differences are subtle but important; a word takes on a slightly different meaning, or body languages is slightly different. That's actually a lot harder than when both people know it's a different culture.
The comments about cancelling weren't about you. Someone else went in and all my posts were marked with a huge number of downvotes. That's either someone with multiple accounts or a bot. Not sure which. They seem to be back to normal now, so perhaps other people upvoted, or perhaps a mod fixed it.
Regarding other countries, I think it's a bit sad when local cultures get stamped out or Westernized. I don't mind Japan being for Japanese, or Ethiopia Ethiopian. I appreciate that kind of diversity too (not everywhere needs to be tolerant). The US is different because it's a nation of immigrants, and the culture should be a melting pot. I want the US, where I live, to be tolerant. I don't apply that standard to others.
All my Asian American friends are just Americans. If you talked talked to them on the phone you wouldn't be able to tell them apart from any other American.
Keep your head down, dont make waves, dont ask for raises, dont cause trouble, follow the rules, be humble, are all great for fitting in to the machine, but not necessarily for becoming a leader.
In my neighborhood (mostly wealthy white) the people are so pushy, I can't believe the expectations they have for how the world should cater to them for every little thing.
Commuting through residential areas by bike, all the most entitled car drivers are found in the wealthy neighborhoods. (For example cutting me off or turning in front of me when I have right of way)
Growing up, I always thought those were places where I was socially awkward and didn't fit in. It wasn't until I did a deep dive into cultures and started managing international teams that I saw that these lined up completely with the culture my roots come from.
I can't talk about specific differences since how people from India differ is not the same as how people from Tanzania differ. A good survey for general differences is Hofstede's writing.
In addition, there are major differences in communication styles. I will mention a few major ones:
1) How positive one is. Americans always smile. They're always doing "well," "fantastic," or similar. Eggs start at medium, and go up from there. That's not true of most of the world.
2) When and how much one shows emotions or talks about personal details in professional settings. Immigrants from cultures who show them less (e.g. Japan) seem emotionally stilted. People from ones who do this more (including many African American communities -- you can't get more American than that) seem unprofessional.
3) China: Emojis / "cute pictures / etc. in professional communication.
4) When one disagrees (and especially across hierarchies), how, and especially how much confidence one shows. This is a gender difference too.
5) Sense of humor (what's funny -- watch foreign films and see where people laugh)
Most people have no problem getting over the big stuff (e.g. Middle Eastern gender relationships), but it's the subtle stuff that puts one in an uncanny valley. There's an almost fractal expansion of nuance in subtle ways language differs, what's appropriate, etc. That's really tough to manage unless both sides are expert in it.
Whenever our American boss comes to visit this side of the pond, this drives me so nuts. Like, if things suck, just say so ffs. We royally fucked something up? We've had challenges. Some new thing is good but not mindblowingly amazing? Excellent.
Your language has a range of expression, please use it :'D
[okay, not bad, decent, awesome, fantabulous]
Depending on where you are, that might maps onto:
[horrible, passable, average, good, excellent]
In a management setting, those communications are sometimes obvious, but just as often you get into dynamics like:
* American managed by non-American: Constantly feeling criticized, like they're failing.
* Non-American managed by American: Often, not realizing when something went wrong.
Both sides need to be aware of the difference for this to work. It's a fair learning curve, but well worth it.
> Your language has a range of expression, please use it :'D
It's a bit of a stereotype, but be glad you don't have an anglophone boss from your side of the pond.
wooflie says "Americans always smile.". Americans is a super set of "Asian Americans". If you're comparing to Asians from Asia then your reply is irrelevant, the topic is not about foreign Asians. If you're not then your statement " Americans always smile." is basically implying that "Asian Americans" are not actually "Americans"
"Coffeeling" says "Whenever our American boss comes to visit this side of the pond". What does "this side of the pond" have to do with anything? The topic is about "Asian Americans" so same side of the pond.
"billfruit" says "Chinese American's may be exposed to the Confucian thought". So what? So might a white American or a Black American. There's more cultural difference between a white person from New Orleans vs Santa Monica than there is between an Asian American growing up in Cleveland and a European American growing up in Cleveland.
He found this to be characteristic of American business culture, and I think this is intuitively right. People in the US that make bold bets and get lucky even if their reasoning was wrong tend to be showered with fame (just take a look at all the celebrity founders), while people who just silently and methodologically work tend to be rather unknown. And that's a business culture definitely more dominant in East-Asian countries in particular.
- H.L. Mencken
This opposition is just as much, if not more, motivated by people feeling like their class interests are at risk.
Are under-represented minorities not highly "motivated by people feeling like their class interests are at risk" in the form of a desire to increase their class? Seems improbable to me, invalidating the rather unkind suggestion that it's only one side that's all about the money.
I certainly didn't mean to suggest that, so I'm sorry if my comment was unclear to you. Indeed, I was actually replying to GP which seemed to be making the insinuation that only one side was about the money, so perhaps your comment would function better as a reply to that one?
I think it's pretty transparent that advocates of affirmative action are interested in promoting the economic interests of under-represented minorities, so I didn't think it needed to be explicitly said. Further, many of the advocates of affirmative action are not of the group being benefited directly, whereas most of those with a stake in dismantling diversity policies seem to stand to benefit from it.
Oh, if that's the case, my apologies for the misunderstanding .
Still affirmative action just looks more arbitrary and nonsensical every year. I don't see how anybody can see what's happening to Asians as anything but racially discriminatory and arbitrarily penalizing.
There is such a broad and rich smorgasbord of cultural traditions from the Asian continent in the US that I don’t think it’s fair to lump them all together. When we start using personal anecdotes to prove some belief, we revert to some sort of pre-modern bigotry.
One thing that is for sure, in an attempt for equity, those with cultural norms to work hard, study hard and excel in life are being discriminated against. In the previous generation it was the Jews (in the US, as well as Europe) and today (broadly speaking) its Americans with an ethnic heritage from Asia. But the same underlying philosophy that killed undesirables in the Gulags of the Soviet and the death camps of the Nazi, are hard at work in the US today under the false pretense of “equity”.
For starters, my father in his full time government job repeatedly got "no leadership potential" reviews. Meanwhile in his part time job with the US Navy, he advanced to the level of captain and in his final act for the Navy led a team that completed its first fully digitized inventory system, saving the Navy billions of dollars, and delivered it under budget and ahead of time. (Fwiw he was non-technical, just "good at making things happen for nerds", his words not mine)
In my personal life, I've encountered several situations where people have expressed to me explicitly or implicitly they didn't consider me to be leader-worthy despite my having successfully managed small teams several times in my career.