The problem with women in tech is leadership in tech.
According to the Harvard Business Review (Hewlett et al., 2008) , 52% of highly qualified females working in tech companies quit their jobs. Fully 63% experience sexual harassment and 45% lack mentors.
I am a teacher. I am also the father of daughters and a scientist. The issue of women in tech has been rumbling deep in my soul for many years. This article by Rachel Thomas (2015) is the best I have read on this topic, most likely because she explains the problem at every stage of the pipeline from the point of view of a woman.
The talented women are already available. They do not have to be taught or created by anyone. We need workplace environments who treat all people in a respectful manner. Then it won’t matter whether we talk about race, religion, or gender. We can focus on the talent of our people.
Melissa McEwen (2017) says “I still love coding, but I hate this industry.” It is not a lack of skill or a lack of people, it is the environment in many companies that is creating an aversion to the jobs. People do not want to work in a place that does not value them.
I have taught teens in science for 20 years and I know that end of the pipeline well. I know for sure that the problem is no longer rooted in schools. From my experience, girls love tech at the same rate as boys.
The phrases like “that’s a boy thing” or “that is for girls” rarely come up in teen conversations. Kids talk to people all over the world from many cultures, so they are learning from a younger age that people are people. Racial and gender intolerance has also declined significantly, as you might expect.
What this means in a group situation, whether it is a classroom, peer group, or workplace, is that the environment must be setup correctly to encourage the right outcomes. People are people. We are all motivated by the same things, like autonomy and purpose. We are also discouraged and chased away by the same things, like oppression and condescension.
Kids do not have the level of hidden bias that older adults may have. They are also in a high school class where teachers like myself are making a conscious effort to involve everyone in STEM, not just girls or boys. In classrooms with good teachers, girls are empowered leaders, curious scientists, award winning competitors, and insightful learners at the same rate as boys.
The social and environmental expectations of our society have made the negative factors unacceptable and the positive factors empowering enough to make the tip towards success. Hate still exists, but it is forced to exist in the dark and slimy places where it belongs.
We still have huge problems with uncertain outcomes looming on the horizon. Unqualified teachers are one problem. Not all teachers are told about the research and not all of us are quite as motivated to go read the studies ourselves. I have even seen school principals who do not even know the barest basics of leadership or motivation theory. It is an ongoing problem for another blog post, but it is time to move up the ladder in the search for solutions.
Good teachers are experts in motivation theory, adolescent development, and organizational psychology. Basically, we know how kids are and what makes them work, learn, and socialize in a healthy way. We setup environments that encourage sharing ideas, respectful debate, and conscious metacognition. Many workplace environments are left to the leaderless pecking orders of insecure bullies and loud fools.
After reading Rachel’s article, I was struck by the terrific sense her suggestions make. I’ve long thought that women don’t need ‘help’ to adjust to situations. It is much more likely that the unhealthy situations are just abhorrent to women who didn’t grow up with the very high level of unhealthy bullying, hazing, and ‘friendly’ torturing that goes on when there are only guys around. It’s a guy thing. I’m not down on men, but the workplace isn’t a locker room. There really isn’t a place for some of the things that happen.
Helen V. Holmes (2014) says, “Getting yourself out of the house to socialize with a bunch of strangers can be hard for many people without the additional fear of the men in the room excluding you or treating you inappropriately. And it’s not right: I get robbed of a community, and the community gets robbed of me.” I doubt this is an isolated example or even an extreme situation. From what I can tell, this is commonplace.
I’m not a fan of trying to police people or change their behaviors by force, but it is behavior change we are looking for. Are there ways to encourage different behaviors without harsh punishments or straitjacket rules that stifle creativity? There are many better ways.
Daniel Pink (2009) shows the mismatch between what science knows and what business does in a very accessible way. He breaks down psychology research into essential ideas without the minutiae. He comes up with a number of very successful strategies based on cornerstones of motivation: autonomy, mastery, and purpose. I found it a tremendous insight as a teacher.
Why do we act the way we do? Would people act the same way in church that they do on a hiking trip? Do people have the same behaviors in the mall that they do in their bedroom? These are dramatic examples, but I have a point. People adjust their behavior to the expectations of the situation and the environment they are in.
Our dictionary structure is loaded with a different set of keys and values based on the task we are performing. That’s my python version of behavior modification. This is something any successful AI will do as a litmus test. It is a basic … human … trait …
And knowing this is how the game developers get us to keep chasing gems or killing dragons. It is how our great consumer society, with all of its waste and excess, has grown. It is how boys in the 1980’s got experience with computers and girls did not.
And it is also the way we can help our children, our families, our coworkers, and our communities change and adapt to different situations.
I’m sure a lot of people have not thought about this in quite as much detail as teachers do, but many of the behaviors people exhibit are triggered by their environment. If you change the environment, they change their own behaviors to adapt to the new dynamics.
You look for triggers that encourage behaviors. So if you want people to be kind (evaluating the kindness of others). If you want creativity, you find out what generates that behavior (chunks of uninterrupted space and time). If you want people to be responsible, you find out what generates responsibility (definite deadlines, regular feedback, plenty of unsupervised time). If it is creative production, you focus on autonomy, mastery, and purpose. (That’s why I wiki.)
Who manages the environment in the classroom? The teacher. A great amount of research has been done regarding this. The single most important factor, even higher than socioeconomic status, in the success of a student is ‘teacher quality.’ The single most important job a teacher does is ‘classroom management.’ I learned over the years that it did not matter at all that I taught chemistry and physics. My subject matter was inconsequential. I have a college degree. I’m overqualified to do anything at a high school level.
I would stop everything, for as long as it took, and do whatever I could as often as I could to make sure my environment was not disturbed. For example, disrespectful, racist, or threatening behaviors were simply not allowed.
We need leaders who are willing to define their vision for a great work environment that will encourage creativity and community. After defining it, they must communicate it simply, clearly, and often. Finally, they must be willing to fight to defend that environment with everything they have. Integrity and character mean a lot.
What would speed things along is more women leaders, but that will take quite a long time in the current climate if we do not first get men to become better leaders with character and vision. I think the best way is train everyone then locate the best leaders wherever you find them, from mailroom to boardroom.
Grab those people and don’t let go. Promote them, share the vision, and let them do what they do. Some will be men and some women. Evaluate hiring and promotion criteria, audit employee data, and decide on goals based on data.
The final point about Google’s paid maternity leave should not be taken lightly. Whether it is for women or men, people will change their life a lot and go through tremendous discomfort to care for their children. Don’t ever put somebody in that position. Offer the maternity leave.
The problem with women in tech is leadership in tech.
Research & References of The problem with women in tech is leadership in tech.|A&C Accounting And Tax Services
Source
0 Comments
Trackbacks/Pingbacks