Superb_Firefighter20
Superb_Firefighter20 t1_j5gjuo9 wrote
Including only a few states’ racial data in the first column is confusing as no other dataset uses states a a parameter thus not particularly relevant. Also, the state data leads the view up to make false comparisons. As example Data Dog is not based in CA but the layout leads to comparison of those numbers. In addition putting the the the US aggregate data within the states obfuscates the number that will give better context for individual companies below.
Superb_Firefighter20 t1_j5i3wak wrote
Reply to comment by teamongered in Racial diversity in top tech & biotech companies [OC] by teamongered
Thank you for clarifying. It is impossible to parse the top and second section as it is now. Maybe break up the companies by headquarter state. It will still be weird for companies like Amazon that probably have a lot employees outside of their headquartered state.
I really like setting up the demographic break down if each company compared to the deviation from population demographic.