Tag Archive for: Women in tech

women in technologyBy Aimee Hansen

We are increasingly conveying a new message to our daughters and nieces when it comes to girls’ and women’s place in STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics): You belong.

“Ada Twist, Scientist” by Andrea Beaty held the top spot on the NYT best sellers among children’s picture books for four weeks as of October 16th (still in the top 10), joining Beaty’s “Rosie Revere, Engineer,” on the list for 76 weeks now.

In August, “Ada’s Ideas: The Story of the Ada Lovelace, the World’s First Computer Programmer” by Fiona Robinson was released. More of the books we give to our children to read are saying, STEM “is for girls” – and not only that, but they are exploring themes like passion, perseverance, and the value of failure.

Ada matters, and so does recognizing all the forgotten or overshadowed women in STEM, because it’s not that women are just entering these fields now, thank you very much. It’s that girls and women are being desperately courted back into them.

A Broken STEM Narrative

In an episode entitled, “When Women Stopped Coding,” NPR noted that women were a pioneering, rising presence in computer science until a stark turning point in 1984: when computers came into homes and the cultural narrative began glorifying them as toys for the boys.

From that year, the rising cultural narrative pushed girls out at home while talented women dropped out of tech in schools. In 1984, women represented 37% of computer science majors and despite the rising demand, today it’s 18%.

This was not the first time capable women were written out of the STEM story, just a recent one. The tired narrative that women don’t belong in STEM replays through the industry stereotypes and cultural dynamics that keep women away, throw an extra hurdle in their path, or drive them out.

Every time a new study (2016) shows that “woman” is still perceived by both men (even more so) and women to be incompatible with “successful scientist” (or programmer, or engineer, or executive, or leader), it’s proof that a limited narrative is still being internalized by our culture.

This “STEM is for men” narrative is dangerous, because it’s also written women right out of a rising proportion of high-reward, high-in-demand jobs. Bad for women, yes. And crippling for the U.S. economy.

Talent Shortage and Competitive Lag

A new report from Accenture entitled “Cracking the Gender Code: Get 3x More Women In Computing” calls the current lack of women a “national crisis with severe implications for America’s place in the global economy and for the future of women.”

Consider that women take home half of computing degrees in Malaysia and nearly half of engineering degrees in Indonesia. In the USA, women receive just 18% of computer science undergraduate degrees and 19% of engineering degrees.

The Accenture report states that job growth within the computer industry is growing at three times the national average, creating unmet demand. In 2015, there were over half a million open computing jobs in the U.S., but only 40,000 computer science graduates.

By 2018, it’s estimated that 2.4 million STEM jobs will be unfilled. The report points out that the shortfall of analysts in the U.S. is greater than the surplus of analysts in India and China combined. Increasingly these jobs are newly emerging jobs that haven’t existed before, requiring new specialized skills.

The glaring reality is that STEM needs women if the U.S. economy hopes to retain any leadership in digital innovation.

Women Sidelined Within Economy

An AAUW report states that engineering and computing represent 80% of the jobs in STEM, offering the highest return on investment and best job prospects.
Studies have shown that STEM jobs pay women better relatively to other jobs.

But women are least represented in engineering (13% of jobs) and computer science (26%), and the Accenture analysis showed that the gender pay gap within U.S. computing roles widened by 48% between 2011 and 2015, as women are missing out on the high-value roles.

Bringing women back into computer science isn’t just about progress in STEM. It’s about “bringing women back to the center of our economy.”

Encouraging Girls and Young Women In Tech

The Accenture report recommends a three-stage strategy to “more than triple the number of women working in computing in the U.S. to 3.9 million by 2025”, or 39% of the workforce. This would generate nearly $300 billion in additional cumulative earnings for women.

“The keys to improvement include: sparking the interest of girls in junior high school, sustaining their commitment in high school where early gains are often lost,” states the report, “and inspiring college undergraduates by reframing computer curriculums.”

Equal exposure is not enough, but actually re-tailoring educational programs towards girls, young women, and women – at all levels. Interventions at the college level would only result in 1.9 million in computing in 2025 (1.2 million now).

The first-ever technology and engineering literacy test in 2014 found that eighth grade girls (45%) were more proficient at engineering and technology related tasks than boys (42%).

A few years later, those same young women are less likely to take the related AP exams (only 20% of computer science exam takers) and less likely in their first college year to intend to major in these fields.

Accenture states that 69% of the potential growth in the computer pipeline is down to attracting girls at junior high age, as 74% of women in computing now were exposed in junior high.

This demands exposing girls to coding in more attractive ways (eg gaming), changing stereotypes, and increasing awareness of all parties (teachers, parents) about how computing can help change the world for the better.

Multiple initiatives here and globally are dedicated to recruiting girls and women into STEM- such as Million Women Mentors, the WISE campaign which seeks to bring one million women into STEM in the UK, and Girls Who Code.

At the high school level is when interest in computer science drops. The report recommends redesigning high school courses, creating grassroots campaigns around the difference STEM can make, and attracting more women teachers.

Supporting Women In Tech

At the college level, we’ve witnessed that strong, focused efforts can result in dramatic changes.

In 2016, Dartmouth graduated more female (54%) than male engineers, a first for a national research university. The program features more collaboration, a supportive network with diverse role models, and a “hands-on, project-based” approach, which exposes students to engineering who may not have chosen it.

In 2016, Harvey Mudd graduated a majority of women in computer science (54%) and physics (52%) for the first time ever, having already graduated a majority in engineering two years ago. Importantly, 64% of the 2016 computer science graduates who had accepted a full-time job had a position in the tech industry, compared to 30% in 2011. Only ten years ago, women were only 10% of computer science majors.

Under President Maria Klawe since 2006, Harvey Mudd has famously made three key changes that removed obstacles for women, such as reworking introductory courses to attract women and integrating research opportunities, and it only took a few years to quadruple CS majors and less than a decade to arrive to the landmark classes of 2014 and 2016.

At Harvey Mudd in 2017, six of the school’s seven department chairs and 38% of its professors will be women.

Biasing Recruitment towards Women

It’s not surprising that a slew of diversity apps designed to help to mitigate bias in hiring and promotion have been rising out of Silicon Valley, in many cases led by women who have faced bias in action in the tech industry.

These ideas help reduce the biases that keep women and minorities out of tech roles. But after such acute exclusion with such growing demand, it will take more than eliminating bias against women to address the massive talent gaps. It will take educational strategies that lean in towards girls and women.

Representation, visibility, and mentorship of women in these fields remains paramount. It starts to rewrite the broken cultural narrative and reminds both girls and women that we do belong – from our children’s books to our leadership.

Being visible is arguably the most influential thing an engineer, scientist, programmer, mathematician, and executive in any of these fields can do to encourage change.

Because it’s not just that girls and women belong. It’s that they are needed.

Women-on-computerWe recently had our 6th annual women in technology career event and several audience questions touched upon the issue of what it means to be a women in technology and even what to do when you fall into the “Imposter Syndrome”. There are stereotypes around how technologists are supposed to look for sure, and research shows that unconscious bias is still an issue from messaging women into the industry to promoting them all the way to the top. However, you are here, you are doing it and you can do two things. Firstly find good sponsors to give you the best of the projects and shepard you so that don’t just have have outstanding experiences but you get to fully appreciate the wins and failures without being judged for your every move. Secondly advocate for yourself fearlessly and believe in yourself because you belong here. Lastly, always know that there are good teams and companies out there so if you are not valued, go somewhere that supports your talent and growth.

By Nicki Gilmour, Executive Coach and Organizational Psychologist

Contact nicki@theglasshammer.com if you would like to hire an executive coach to help you navigate the path to optimal personal success at work

women in technologyEvolving digital technology demands more communication and accessibility from all employees, which leads to a culture of multi-tasking. But as leaders face increased communication demands, it’s important that they retain the value of listening.

Listening is Getting More Difficult

Active listening has been identified as one of the ten attributes of embodied leadership. Effective listening by leaders has been noted as the first step in creating trust within organizations. Also research shows that supervisor listening contributes to employee job satisfaction, satisfaction with the supervisor, and fosters a strong and beneficial exchange between leaders and team members.

Yet according to Accenture’s #ListenLearnLead study of 3,600 business professionals across 30 countries, the vast majority of professionals (64%) feel that listening has become more difficult in today’s workplace.

While nearly all (96%) of global professionals judged themselves to be “good listeners”, nearly all (98%) also report multi-tasking at least part of the day.

The study found that eight in ten respondents said they multi-task on conference calls with work emails (66%), instant messaging (35%), personal emails (34%), social media (22%) and reading news and entertainment (21%). In fact, professionals report distracted listening and divided attention unless they are held directly and visibly responsible within the context of the meeting.

“Digital is changing everything, including the ways in which we communicate. In turn, the way we communicate is changing how we listen, learn and lead in the workplace,” says Nellie Berroro, Managing Director, Global Inclusion & Diversity at Accenture. “Today, truly listening means not just watching our nonverbal cues in face-to-face meetings, but also maintaining our focus on conference calls, staying present, and resisting the urge to multi-task with instant messages and texts.”

Multi-Tasking Means More Quantity, But Less Quality

The attraction to multi-tasking seems to be a double-edged sword in the workplace that pins quantity against quality.

In Accenture’s study, 64% of Millennials, 54% of Gen Xers, and 49% of Baby Boomers reported multi-tasking during at least half of their work day. While 66% of professionals agreed multi-tasking enables them to get more done at work, 36% report that distractions prevent them from doing their best work. Millennials were at the extreme on each – feeling multi-tasking meant getting more done (73%) and yet distractions prevented them from doing their best work (41%).

However it’s traditional interruptions imposed by others (telephone calls & unscheduled meetings & visitors) rather than technology that were reported as most disruptive, perhaps due to the lack of control over these distractions.

What suffers? The trade-offs reported include decreased focus, lower-quality work, and diminished team relationships. But can leaders afford these trade-offs, too?

Despite the Benefits, Are Leaders Too Accessible?

“Our survey found technology both helps and hinders effective leadership,” says Borrero. On the positive side, 58% of survey respondents saw technology as a benefit for leaders enabling them to communicate quickly with their teams, allowing both time and geographic flexibility (47%) as well as accessibility (46%).

However, 62% of women and 54% of men felt technology made leaders over-stretched by being too accessible. 50% of respondents felt it forced multi-tasking and 40% felt it distracted from culture and relationship building. 55% felt a top challenge for leaders is information overload.

Borrero recommends practicing discipline when needed in disengaging from other technologies to give full focus to the material in front of you, such as putting your mobile device on silent during phone conferences and actively noting key points. “When you face information overload,” she says, “become comfortable with turning off technology. For example, you might disconnect at night, so you can recharge, and decide not to look at your phone until the morning.”

Importantly, when it comes to effective leadership and overcoming barriers to it, focusing on quality of communication and connection matters most – and that may very well start with listening.

The most important leadership attributes identified by the study were the “soft skills” of effective communication (55%), ability to manage change (47%), and ability to inspire others and ideas (45%), closely followed by understanding team members.

Yet this is also where skills suffer: the two most commonly perceived obstacles to effective team leadership were a lack of interpersonal skills (50%) and a lack of communication skills (44%).

Getting Better At Listening

While digital technology brings many advantages, leaders who compromise at listening may compromise their ability to lead effectively.

A Westminster Business School report highlights, “Listening is an essential skill in all situations and it is particularly important for leaders and managers to actually hear what others say, not simply what we think we hear them say…All great leadership starts with listening. That means listening with an open mind, heart and will. It means listening to what is being said as well as what isn’t being said.”

Despite its importance to leadership, leaders are too often ineffective at truly listening according to an HBR article by Christine M. Riordan. She notes, “The ability and willingness to listen with empathy is often what sets a leader apart.”

Riordan outlines three key behaviors leaders can practice that are linked with empathetic listening:

1) Hearing with all of your senses and acknowledging what you’ve heard.

This means “recognizing all verbal and nonverbal cues, including tone, facial expressions, and other body language.” It’s as much about listening to what is not said as what is said, and probing a bit deeper, as well as acknowledging others feelings or viewpoints and the act of sharing them.

2) Processing what is being shared and heard.

This means “understanding the meaning of the messages and keeping track of the (key) points of the conversation.” Effective leaders are able to capture and remember global themes, key messages, and points of agreement and disagreement.

3) Responding to and encouraging communication.

This means “assuring others that listening has occurred and encouraging communication to continue.” Acknowledging others verbally or non-verbally, asking clarifying questions, or paraphrasing reflects consideration of their input. This can also mean following-up to ensure others know listening has occurred.

According to Accenture’s Borrero, “Leaders are role models employees emulate, so it’s important for them to set a good example. In our increasingly hyper-connected digital workplace, we all need to practice ‘active listening,’ including paraphrasing, taking notes and asking questions. At Accenture, we offer a number of courses in effective listening, which is critical to our company as we focus on serving clients.”

In today’s leadership context, where effective leadership means showing social awareness not just self-awareness, leaders may employ technology to help them do it, but one way or another, it’s important they find a way to truly listen.

By Aimee Hansen