Women and Information Technology: AnAnalysis of the Work Environment and IT’s”Brogramming” Culture

Mylinh Pham

Abstract

Not only is the number of women taking careers in information technology low, butthe number of women leaving the industry is also high. Together, these contribute tothe extreme shortage of women in technology and the need for more people in generalto fill computer related jobs. Many speculate that there are so few women becausethey are forced to face a culture of ”brogramming” that this male dominated field hascreated. This research project provides a look into the ”brogramming” culture withan analysis of a self-conducted survey study comparing both males and females intheir job satisfactions, self-assessment, relationship with co-workers, relationship withsupervisors, and their plans for the future. The results support the literature thatpoints to a ”brogramming” culture that discriminates against females. With theseresults, this project intends to contribute to the current literature surrounding womenin information technology and the gender biases that continue to exist, increasing theunderstanding of the problem at hand.

Keywords: ”brogramming” culture; gender bias

1 Introduction

Women have been greatly underrepresented in the technology industry for a longtime. Not only do the women who pursue careers in this sector experience thechallenges that accompany breaking stereotypes, but they also face a differenttype of work environment unique to technology. With the information technol-ogy industry comes a preconceived notion of the kind of person someone in ITneeds to be - a white male. The environment that the IT industry is accusedof creating has been labeled with the term brogramming” culture. The techindustry is not only more male-dominated in numbers, but it is also governedby a certain male-culture that is tech’s ”brogramming” culture [West, 2015].What has evolved to be known as a ”brogramming” culture, to put simply,refers to a social interaction that propagates masculinity over femininity. Simi-lar to the old term ”Boys Club” that was once used to describe this culture. Itimplied that only men worked in tech and women were neither seen nor allowed.

1

1 Introduction 2

However, ”Brogramming” is more a specific term and also touches on behav-iors. Combining the words bro and programming, the term brogramming refersto a brotherly bond amongst programmers, referencing the common stereotypeof bros in fraternities; they go out together and have fun.[Sydell, 2013] Peo-ple have described brogrammers as a testosterone-fueled breed, throwing backshots of alcohol while writing code [MacMillan, 2012]. They stick together, theyhave each others back, and have a reputation of disrespecting and objectifyingwomen. Regardless of any mistakes, they will pick each other up and dust offtheir shoulders. [Revensencio, 2015, MacMillan, 2012]. As it creates an intim-idating and unwelcoming environment for anyone who does not fall under thelabel, it encourages an exclusive and sexist place that further alienates womenin an industry that is already male-dominated [Miller, 2014]. This environmentoften turns women away from pursing their IT careers further and keep womenfrom considering IT careers at all.

For those women who choose to break the stereotype and enter the ”bro-gramming” culture, the rates of attrition and pressure are much higher thantheir male counterparts [Ashcraft and Blithe, 2009]. They are forced to facesubconscious gender biases and divides, defying the stereotypes and boundariesthat persist, sometimes with no support from their supervisors. The culture thatpersists in IT affects how women are affected by working in a male-dominatedindustry. There are numerous amounts of opportunities becoming available asIT becomes more crucial, so even with a high average salary and unfilled jobpositions, women are leaving the It industry or not entering at all [Melymuka,2008]. As an important issue to address, ITs ”brogramming” culture contributesto the shortage of females, so any efforts to remove this environment can helpincrease the number of workers in this industry [Peck, 2014].

This paper aims to analyze this culture and focus on how it affects womenand their job satisfaction. Although determining what discourages women fromentering the IT field is important as well, this paper focuses on the womenalready in the industry. The current problem of the environment needs to beaddressed before more people are encouraged to enter. For example, if theenvironment is as exclusive and damaging as literature is saying, then a femalewho is passionate about technology can still leave and be unhappy if she does notfeel welcome. Working is more than the work itself; it is also about the peoplethat someone will be surrounded by every day. If there is a way to increase theretention rates for women, potential women looking to enter the field will havefewer reasons to be discouraged. To truly understand this problem, this studyseeks answers to questions about the environment for females in comparison tomales. Does the brogramming culture exist? How does a female’s relationshipwith her coworkers and supervisors affect the way she thinks of herself and herabilities? How does the environment allow females to succeed or hinder them?

From the literature surrounding the ”brogramming” culture, I anticipatethat there will be a positive correlation between how a female is treated by hercoworkers and how satisfied she is at work, meaning if she treated well, then shewill be satisfied and vice versa. Furthermore, I anticipate that females will havefewer supervisors than men, causing them to have a less clear and supported

2 Information Technology’s Current State of Affairs and Why it Matters 3

career path [Hewlett et al., 2014].In the following section, this paper will present the current state of affairs

of information technology to put this data in perspective and highlight whythis study is important. Section three will analyze existing literature. Drawingon the knowledge from three reports, Athena Factor 2.0, Women in IT: TheFacts, and Double Jeopardy, this paper will analyze the current literature sur-rounding IT and the ”brogramming” culture, as well as summarize a createdsurvey and conducted interviews to contribute to this knowledge. The method-ology is described in section four, detailing the survey design and procedures.In section five, I present the results, and in section six, I discuss the implica-tions and significance of the results. From this conversation, section seven willconclude the paper by presenting changes to advance and improve technology’swork environment.

2 Information Technology’s Current State

of Affairs and Why it Matters

The role of technology is becoming more and more crucial in ultimately everypart of the U.S. and global economy. As one of the fastest growing industriesin the United States, the technology industry is estimated to have more than1.4 million computer related jobs available in 2018 [Ashcraft and Blithe, 2009].The United States continues to become a more technologically advanced countrywith time, and it needs many technical workers to help it innovate, create, andprogress. However, the number of people going into and staying in IT has notbeen able to keep up with the number of job opportunities created, leaving manyof them open and unfilled. Since 1990, the number of women in technology hasbeen declining [Misa, 2010].

One reason may be that initial interest is dropping as the graduation ratesfor people with computer science degrees are falling. As the interest in thesemajors decline, fewer people will be graduating with computer science degrees.If this trend continues, then more than half of technology jobs will be unfilledby 2018. A NET 43 percent of U.S. IT companies are already reporting thatthey are understaffed, but the technology industry keeps growing exponentially.CompTIA [2015] In fact, tech jobs held by women have decreased from 37 to 25percent in recent years, and not only is the industry failing to attract women,but they are also failing to retain them as well; 56 percent of women in IT willleave the industry mid-career. This percentage is double the quitting rate formen in IT and is also higher than the rate for women in science and engineering[Ashcraft and Blithe, 2009].

Another factor contributing to the lack of talent is the lack of women [SMCCand WFA, 2015]. Women who are highly-qualified have opportunities to fillthese open jobs, but the industry is failing to attract and keep their talent.The main barrier that women are facing the technology is the fitting stereotypethat exists. This does not refer to the stereotype that females are naturally

3 Literature Review 4

and biologically worse at math, science, and technology than males, rather, itrefers to the culture that surrounds it. Arguably having the biggest genderdisparity, the technology industry has a history of discrimination that has notimproved, and because it has not improved, the technology industry is currentlyfacing two main threats decreased interest and decreased retention [Spoor andSchmitt, 2011]. The technology industry is booming and will continue to growin the following years, but jobs aren’t getting filled nearly as fast enough. Thetechnology industry is one of the most important sectors in the world today,but if it is not receiving enough help, then it cannot reach its full potential andadvance the world.

3 Literature Review

A study called the ”Women in IT: The Facts” recognizes that while the percent-ages of women are significantly increasing in other science fields, it is decliningfor those in tech. In their report, Ashcraft and Blithe analyzes the currentstate of affairs for women in IT and identifies the barriers that contribute tothe current state of affairs. The barriers include unconscious biases, isolation,supervisory relationships, promotion/performance review processes, and com-peting responsibilities. Although 74 percent of women are reporting that theylove their work, 56 percent are still leaving mid-career. The unconscious andsubtle bias put unwarranted pressures on women, who are tokenized and un-appreciated in the work that they do. This leads to isolation, especially whenthere are no mentors or sponsors to provide good support for those who areminimized. Ashcraft reports that 40 percent of technical women lack role mod-els, more than half lack mentors, and 84 percent lack sponsors or someone whowill support their accomplishments and goals. Without people to validate theirabilities and help them see their success, women have to work harder in order tobe noticed and to get the same level of appreciation as their male counterparts.Holding a mere 9-11 percent of corporate officer positions, women in leadershipis clearly lacking, so with these numbers in combination with an unconsciousbias, female tech employees often do not receive the amount of support thatthey need. Supervisors play a large role in many aspects of an employees worklife, and without proper supervision and feedback, women become unhappywith their work and are inhibited from moving up in their company, genderbiases playing a role, once again, in evaluations for promotions. Not only arewomen disadvantaged in mentorship and sponsorship, but they are also unfairlyevaluated with stereotypical masculine characteristics, problem-solving, action-oriented, and result driven, which are criticized when encompassed by females.Discussing the threats of ignoring the gender bias, the report gives a warningabout ITs inability to fill half of the necessary jobs in the coming years, as wellas financial losses and lower customer satisfaction. In addressing the threatsand recognizing the barriers, the report goes on further to provide solutions tothe problem. From training supervisors, to addressing biases through 100 per-

3 Literature Review 5

cent talent, to providing more flexible scheduling to acknowledge work and lifebalance, the solutions provided are direct responses to the barriers that womenface [Ashcraft and Blithe, 2009].

The second study, ”Athena Factor 2.0” is a follow up report of the 2008”Athena Factor.” The situation for women in technology has evolved in bothpromising and frustrating ways since the first study. While the demand forSET talent intensifies, women are still facing barriers that discourage womenfrom filling these gaps. Even though 80 percent of women report that theylove their work, many still feel stalled in their jobs and do not believe thatthey will be able to progress and move up. In fact,the study reports that 32percent of women in technology are likely to leave their jobs within the nextyear. Although overt bias is less prevalent, women still face antigens, which arefactors that ultimately create antibodies against women. Since the first report,new antigens have been identified. The first antigen is that SET industries havehostile macho cultures, in which women are marginalized by lab-coat, hard-hatgeeks, causing exclusion and promulgating biases. The environment encouragesa sexist and demoralizing place for an employee who cannot relate to return toand work at every day. The second antigen that women face is isolation. Themale peers form buddy networks that form relationships inside and outside oftheir jobs. Therefore, women are ultimately faced with coworkers who belong toexclusive groups with no place for them to fit in. In addition to feeling isolatedamong their peers, women lack female supervisors and are not provided withthe same support as their coworkers [Hewlett et al., 2014, 2008].

The last report is Double Jeopardy by Joan C. Williams, Katherine W.Phillips, Erika V. Hall. This research project recognized that the stereotypesfor those who succeed in STEM are white males, so it conducted a study onwomen of color in STEM. 60 female scientists of color were interviewed becausethey face a double jeopardy, encountering race as well as gender bias. Their datasuggests that there are five common obstacles, and all of the interviewed womenhave experienced at least one of these in addition to racial stereotypes prove-it-again, tightrope, maternal wall, tug of war, and sexual harassment. Facedmost by African-Americans, the prove-it-again bias stems from the stereotypicalassumption that women are incompetent and cannot be good scientists, so theymust work harder and provide more evidence in order to prove themselves. Theirmistakes are magnified and their ideas are stolen, often discredited for theirsuccess. The tightrope is described as having to walk a fine line between beingtoo feminine or too masculine, and depending on which a woman personifies, sheis either liked or respected. Having to cautiously speak their mind, women mustbe cognizant of emasculating their male counterparts. It is a constant struggleto find the impossible balance. The maternal wall is said to be most damagingbecause it prevents women from continuing or returning to their jobs. Thisbias, which Asian-Americans face most, assumes that mothers cannot succeedas a scientist because they will be uncommitted. When a group of people aremarginalized and unappreciated, they sometimes are pitted against one anotherin an attempt to break free from the stereotype in a bias called tug of war.Their distancing from and criticism of other women contributes to the sexism

4 Methodology 6

in the IT culture, holding the mindset that there is only room for one.

4 Methodology

The methodology of the study involves a survey distributed through e-mail andintensive interviews with five information technology employees.

4.1 Distribution

The survey was distributed by e-mail for one month to people I knew first. Ithen relied on these people and their connections to pass it on to other peoplein working IT. I also reached out to Faceook groups dedicated to women intechnology to take the survey and help circulate it. This process allowed for amore diverse population sample, as it would not single out one organization orone area. Participation in this study was completely voluntary, so to encourageand increase participation and distribution of the survey, there was a $50 giftcard raffle for every 20 complete responses gathered.

4.2 Survey Population

Participants in this study included 38 people working in the information technol-ogy industry in the United States. Of the 38 participants, 21 identified as femalesand 17 identified as males. All of the participants identified as White/Caucasian,while one identified as multi-ethnic, being White/Caucasian and Asian or Pa-cific Islander. More than 65 percent of the companies had its headquarters onthe West Coast, being California, Oregon, and Washington, and more than 82percent of these companies had less than 1,000 employees. While 60.5 percentsaid they wanted to go into the IT industry during their mid-career, 60.5 percentsaid they have always been passionate about the industry. Positions held by re-spondents consisted of engineers, developers, consultants, directors, managers,and coordinators, and administrators.

4.3 Design and Procedure

In order to analyze how the current culture of IT employees affected a femaleswork satisfaction and desire to stay in the technology industry, a survey wascreated. There is already a lot of literature and reports surrounding women andthe professional pressures that they face on a daily basis. However, few reportshave specifically studied the direct relationship between a females professionalsatisfaction and the support she receives from her supervisors and co-workers.

The informed consent forms were used to inform participants of the proce-dures, the purpose of this study, voluntary participation, risks and benefits ofparticipating, and contact information of the researchers. Additional materialsincluded a self-compiled survey. Explored through a variety of styled questions

4 Methodology 7

such as rating, multiple choice, and short answer, the survey sought to inves-tigate how the environment created by co-workers and supervisors affected theway that employees felt about themselves and their jobs.

With 24 questions, the survey began with 10 that would help understand thebasic demographics of the people it reached. These starting questions regardedtheir level of experience and motivations to go into IT. Their companys size andgeography was also questioned in order to open the door to see if size or areawere factors that played into more or less gender bias. Continuing with fourrating styled questions, two questions asked participants to rate how much theyagreed with personal and self-reflecting statements about their jobs. These weremeant to help determine their professional satisfaction and self-worth. This wasimportant because these responses set the foundation for what the remainingquestions would be related back to. The next rating styled question regardedco-workers and group settings, asking if they felt respected and/or heard bythe people they worked with. The support of and the ability to be open withsupervisors were examined next, also using a rating scale. Short answer ques-tions about what supervisors are doing and how they can improve in terms ofsupporting their employees followed. The survey ended with questions abouttheir future goals, personal and professional. One asked participants to ratehow much they agreed with the statement saying that saw themselves stayingin the IT industry for the next five years. The following was a more long termquestion, asking if they saw themselves staying in the industry until retirement.Continuing with personal questions about kids, the survey asked if they hadchildren and if they wanted children in the future. The last question was ashort answer question that allowed participants to voice their opinions on if andhow a female IT employees experience differed from their male counterpart. Af-ter the survey was completed, the participants were given the option to providetheir e-mail addresses in order to be entered into the $50 gift card raffle. Theparticipants were then asked if they had any questions and were thanks for theircooperation.

4.4 Scope and Limitations

The way of distribution caused many limitations to the population size in thisstudy. Firstly, it was an indirect form of circulation, relying on other peopleto pass it on. Unless people receive assured, personal benefits or are askeddirectly to complete the survey, it is not an effective way to accumulate a largepopulation size. People are not only going to receive the survey and not fill itout, but there is also a lower chance that they will pass it on, further limitingthe population size. Even with an incentive to send the survey out to morepeople, increasing the number of gift cards awarded by increasing the numberof people the survey reaches, some people may not see that the extra timeis worth a higher chance of receiving a $50 gift card. The time limit of onemonth was short, especially for this method of distribution, further limiting thepopulation size. The small number of respondents resulted in having any oneresponse hold a lot of weight. Therefore, a single number for one of the rating

5 Results 8

styled questions had a large impact on the calculated average. Because of thesmall size and these limitations, the numbers cannot be representative of thetechnology industry and are too small to extract reliable trends.

5 Results

To assess the work environment in information technology, both males andfemales were asked to rate how much they agreed with a certain statementfrom 1 to 5: 1 being they strongly disagreed, 3 being they neither agreed nordisagreed, and 5 being they strongly agreed. These statements were about theirjob satisfaction, their own skills, their opportunity to succeed, their coworkers,and their supervisors. The ratings were then separated by the respondent’sgender, male or female. Responses were only considered if they worked in thetechnology industry, and any position held was accepted because regardlessof someone’s title, the ”brogramming” culture exists as long as it was in theindustry.

Figure 1 depicts the averages for questions used to understand a male’s anda female’s job satisfaction, all of which were generally high. Although there areno significant differences, it is interesting to note that females rated their senseof belonging and happiness lower than their male counterparts, but still, femaleswere more interested in their jobs, although barely. While the females’ ratingfor belonging, happiness, and job interest stayed consistent, the males’ ratingfluctuated. Overall, the males felt very strongly that that they were happy to beat their jobs, although their interest was less so. In Figure 2, a combination ofstatements regarding an IT employee’s self-assessment, success, and work ethicwere used for participants to rate. Although women were more confident in theirabilities when compared to men, they did not believe that they had the same,equal opportunities to succeed; females agreed that they had to work harder.Women also agreed more than men that it was because of their abilities thatthings went well, rather than because of luck or chance. Men slightly disagreedwith the statement saying they have to work harder than others to succeed,mostly believing that they had the same opportunity as others.

The relationships and interactions with fellow coworkers were measured next(Figure 3). While men felt equally supported by all of their coworkers, both menand women about the same, women felt significantly more supported by theirfellow female coworkers than their male ones. Although females felt less valuedand heard out than men, they often preferred to take the lead and make deci-sions in a team, and men generally did not prefer it one way or another. Bothsexes mostly disagreed with experiencing and observing sexual harassment atwork. The supervisors of respondents were generally shown in a positive man-ner for both male and females, although females often rated their supervisorshigher (Figure 4). Meeting the needs of their employees well, supervisors wererespectful, supportive, and fair. Even though it is not a significant difference,the average rating for supervisors being supportive of career goals for women

5 Results 9

was .5 higher in agreement than men. Men and women disagreed that theirjobs made it hard to balance their lives the same, while females felt that it wasslightly harder to balance their life in general (Figure 5).

The decision to continue to stay in the technology industry until retirementhad slightly more significant differences. While almost all men except for twoplan to stay in the industry, only one third of females were positive that theywould stay. More than half of women were still unsure, and two women knewthat they did not want to stay. However, 100% of men and women planned tostay in the industry for at least the next five years.

Fig. 1: Job Satisfaction Rating Averages

Fig. 2: Self-Evaluation Rating Averages

5 Results 10

Fig. 3: Co-Worker Relationship Rating Averages

Fig. 4: Supervisor Relationship Rating Averages

Fig. 5: Attrition Rating Averages

5 Results 11

Fig. 6: Plans to stay in IT for the next 5 years

Fig. 7: Plans to stay in IT until Retirement

6 Discussion 12

6 Discussion

Although the sample size was not large enough to represent the technologyindustry and measure significant differences between male and female employees,this data shows that there are some general patterns to the differences. Thisdata supports the argument that there is correlation between how women aretreated in the world of technology and how they perceive their job satisfaction.

The data shows that men are happy with their jobs even if their jobs are notinteresting to them. This can help support the argument that there is, in fact, a”brogramming” culture that is welcoming and intriguing to men and men only.They do not have to be passionate about their job, but they can still feel happilypart of it perhaps. Perhaps this is due to an immediate connection with theircoworkers who are mostly male. They are surrounding themselves with peoplewho will support them regardless of any situation, as Figure 3 shows. When menmake mistakes, they dust themselves off while their other male coworkers pullthem back up on their feet [Hewlett et al., 2008]. Therefore, in a place wheremen find support in each other, it makes sense that males are more happy attheir jobs. Furthermore, believing that they have equal opportunity to succeedat work, men don’t have to work harder than other to do well. Because theyfit the norm of a typical worker in the ”brogramming” culture, they are notexpected to prove themselves and be noticed because it is assumed that theyare already proficient. This makes it difficult for those who do not fit into thestereotype, as women feel like they have to work harder (Figure 3). Furthermore,contrary to current literature, this data shows that women are well aware of theirskills and abilities as people in technology [Kay and Shipman, 2014]. However,they are still being overlooked, as they feel that they have to work harder thantheir male counterparts, recognizing that there is no equal opportunity.

Female employees experienced a slight drop in ratings when stating that theyfelt like a part of their jobs to feeling like a valued member of their jobs. Havinga place to belong or a part to play is not the same as feeling appreciated andvalued as a person and employee. This correlates to the mere slight agreementthat females felt that their ideas were heard out and considered, while malesfell between agreeing and strongly agreeing. If women do not feel as supportedby their male coworkers, who make up most of the company’s employees, thenthey are forced to rely on each other as they push their way to the front. Thisdata population showcased women who best supported other women and wholike to take charge. Perhaps this is what they need to do in order to be noticed.Relating back to Figure 2 that showed women felt the need to work harder inorder to succeed, this data further proves that a ”broculture” exists and makesit difficult for a woman to be appreciated and to enjoy her job.

It is also surprising to see the low number for both observing and experienc-ing sexual comments and/or sexual harassment because more than two thirds ofwomen in STEM report having observed and/or experienced this [Clancy et al.,2014]. Perhaps and explanation for this is that the participants did not under-stand or recognize the subtleties that should be considered sexual harassment.

6 Discussion 13

The positive feedback regarding supervisors from both sexes was also sur-prising. The need for good supervisors who will be the voice and encouragementfor women especially has been stressed in much of the literature today [Hewlettet al., 2008, Ashcraft and Blithe, 2009].

Both men and women agree that the supervisors treat employees fairly andequally, so why do women feel that they need to work harder than men tosucceed? One possibility is the different psychology between men and women.Men tend to be more confident in their abilities than women. For example, aman and a woman are thinking about applying for the same job. The womanis much more qualified than the man, but she still does not meet all of therequirements. This discourages her from applying, but the man still applies andgets hired. This confidence instilled in them is displayed as a sign of competence,and therefore, males are seen as more able and, as a result, do not work as hardas females [Reuben et al., 2012]. Further promoting a ”brogramming” culture inwhich males dominate the work environment and exclude women, it is possiblethat the culture is most prevalent within the male coworkers. They are theones pushing females down and it harder to reach the top [Freehill et al., 2009].Because the lack of good supervisors has been commonly highlighted throughoutliterature, institutions have been focusing on improving their supervisor andfemale employee relations and have been making good progress.

The attrition evaluation shows that both men and women the same do notbelieve their jobs interfere with balancing their lives. Therefore, this data sug-gests that women do not leave the technology industry because of the pressuresand attrition that they face at work.

Many women were unsure of their long term goals in regards to their careers.There is a correlation in the data that shows that many of the women who wereunsure of staying in the technology industry until retirement also answered thatthey did want children in the future. Perhaps this correlation supports literaturethat blames motherhood for loss of female tech workers. Reasons for this beingthat their company does not provide maternity leave or flexible hours or thattechnology jobs are too demanding that mothers want to leave the industry toraise their kids. Therefore, because they want to be mothers and have childrenin the future, they are unsure if they will be able to balance their lives or beprovided with good the maternity benefits. In a way, this also contributes to theexclusive ”brogramming” culture as it shames females who pursue motherhoodby making it too difficult to return after giving birth. However, companiesare providing more accommodating options for both mothers and parents, suchas company nurseries and ”bonding leave.” This allows employees with newchildren an additional 8 weeks of paid time off with their families on top of aprogram giving new moms 13 weeks [Driskill, 2015].

The method of distribution also revealed other insights regarding the ”bro-gramming” culture. One reason for the survey’s lack of circulation is that thosewho received it did not want to pass it on because they did not want to belabeled as that person, especially if female, who cares about the inequality andsexism in the technology industry [Lapowsky, 2014]. The survey data showsthat women do face gender bias to some degree, however, they do not want to

7 Conclusion: Removing Barriers for Women 14

be the ones to call it out. The lack of openness and the fear of being judgedfor bringing awareness to inappropriate behavior, especially towards women,further contributes to this sexist culture.

Although this was not a part of my intended research, it is interesting to notethat all of the participants identified as White/Caucasian. Indeed, this supportsthe argument that the technology industry is not only dominated by males,but also by White/Caucasians, creating an even more exclusive environment[Williams et al., 2014].

A main obstacle that was present in this study was the small population size,making it difficult to obtain significant data. Ideally, it would have been morebeneficial to have a more representative sample, even if it focused on a specificarea such as the west coast. This would allow for a more accurate average, sinceone rating score had a bigger impact than it should on a sample size.

7 Conclusion: Removing Barriers for Women

In conclusion, there are many reasons for why women are leaving the technologyindustry, a main one being the ”brogramming” culture. However, there are alsomany things that companies can do in order to help the industry retain theirwomen.

It takes everyone, whether male or female, to change a culture of something.Not only do women need to be empowered, but men also need to provide womenthe space to be empowered and should also be empowering them [Siever, 2014].When including everyone, it encourages everyone to do their part, so there isntthat one person who cries sexism or racism or discrimination [Romano, 2013].One way to educate and empower is to encourage events regarding Women inIT, but it can be advertised in a way to encourage male participants to attend,as they should be included in the conversation as well. Companies can alsohold programs and required sensitivity and diversity trainings to help createand build a safe and brave work environment for those who are marginalized[Chamorro-Premuzic, 2013].

Furthermore, whether it is for hiring or for promoting, there also needs tobe a more concrete criteria when evaluating applicants and job performances.Companies should be identifying the issues regarding gender and race equitywithin their own companies to help pinpoint the root of problem that contributesto it. By identifying the issues, companies can then address the most criticalones by implementing practices. Hiring managers will have a stricter rubricthat will make it difficult to stray from. This will help remove biases and focuspurely on talent and skills of employers. [SMCC and WFA, 2015].

Lastly, companies should be reaching out and actively pursuing diversity.With a reputation of a brogramming culture, women are less likely to put them-selves in this situation thinking that they are not valued nor supported. Becausediversity is much more than filling a quota, companies should avoid cosmeticdiversity by identifying diverse backgrounds and skill sets that would partic-

7 Conclusion: Removing Barriers for Women 15

ularly help move the business forward. However, diversity should not end atrecruitment. Different programs to introduce new hires into the workplace canbe beneficial in letting them know where the opportunities of advancement are,so everyone starts the job with the same knowledge to succeed. Actively pursu-ing diversity breeds innovation, helps in problem solving, and retains top talent[Wang, 2015]. Diversity is good.

References

Catherine Ashcraft and Sarah Blithe. Women in it: The facts. Report, NationalCenter for Women & Information Technology, 2009.

Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic. Why do so many incompetent men become leaders?Harvard Business Review, 2013.

Kathryn B. H. Clancy, Robin G. Nelson, Julienne N. Rutherford, and KatieHinde. Survey of academic field experiences. Research article, University ofPennsylvania, 2014.

CompTIA. It industry outlook 2015. Research report, CompTIA PropertiesLLC, 2015.

Dana Driskill. Intel wants you to bond with your baby. Good, 2015.

Lisa M. Freehill, Nicole Di Fabio, Peggy Layne, Ane Turner Johnson, and SarahHood. Women in engineering: The illusion of inclusion. SWE Magazine, 55,2009.

Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Carolyn Buck Luce, Lisa J. Servon, Laura Sherbin, PeggyShiller, Eytan Sosnovich, and Karen Sumberg. The athena factor: Reversingthe brain drain in science, engineering, and technology. Research report,Harvard Business Review, 2008.

Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Laura Sherbin, Fabiola Diudonne, Christina Fargnoli, andCatherine Fredman. Athena factor 2.0. Executive summary, Center for TalentInnovation, 2014.

Katty Kay and Claire Shipman. The Confidence Code. HarperBusiness, 2014.

Issie Lapowsky. This is what tech’s ugly gender problem really looks like.WIRED, 2014.

Douglas MacMillan. The rise of the ’brogrammer’. Bloomberg Business, 2012.

Kathleen Melymuka. Why women quit technology. Computer World, 2008.

Claire Cain Miller. Technology’s man problem. The New York Times, 2014.

Thomas J. Misa. Gender Codes. Wiley-IEEE Computer Society Pr, 2010.

7 Conclusion: Removing Barriers for Women 16

Emily Peck. The stats on women in tech are actually getting worse. TheHuffington Post, 2014.

Ernesto Reuben, Pedro Rey-Biel, Paola Sapienza, and Luigi Zingales. The emer-gence of male leadership in competitive environments. Journal of EconomicBehavior & Organization, 83:111–117, June 2012.

Jonha Revensencio. The truth about why there’s not enough women in tech.TechCo, 2015.

Aja Romano. In defense of adria richards and call-out culture. The Daily Dot,2013.

Scarlett Siever. Including men in the conversation about women. HuffingtonPost, 2014.

Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce SMCC and Women’s Funding Al-liance WFA. 100

Jennifer R. Spoor and Michael T. Schmitt. things are getting better isn’t alwaysbetter:considering women’s progress affects perceptions of and reactions tocontemporary gender inequality. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33:24–36, 2011.

Laura Sydell. Blazing the trail for female programmers. In National PublicRadio. All Tech Considered, 2013.

Richard Wang. 5 ways to fix the tech industry’s diversity problem. Fast Com-pany, 2015.

Karen West. Breaking the code: Women add new perspective to software engi-neering. Seattle Business, 2015.

Joan C. Williams, Katherine W. Phillips, and Erika V. Hall. Double jeopardy?:Gender bias against women of color in science. Report, WorkLife Law, 2014.