I'm a geekette who enjoys playing with new technology for software developers. I work as a Developer Evangelist for Microsoft. My current focus is on Windows Store development for Windows 8.
Let's Meet!
Last weekend at the CodeStock conference, Mike Neel and I ran a session entitled “Why aren't women speaking at CodeStock? (and other WiT issues)”. A little background on this session: Mike Neel is the organizer of CodeStock and a longtime champion for Women in Technology. He reached out to me some time ago and told me that after the call for speakers had closed, I was the *only* female who had submitted sessions to present at CodeStock. He had wanted to hold a WiT panel or something at the conference as well, but it looked like there weren’t enough women for a panel discussion. Therefore, he proposed this session as a community discussion and asked if I would co-lead it with him. As the conference approached, Britt King reached out to me on Twitter and asked if I could publish any insights from the session. I’m glad he did, as I captured better notes from what turned out to be an amazing conversation. With the participants’ permission, here are some of the items of discussion and tangible solutions to this issue. (NOTE: I lay out a variety of different thoughts and opinions from the conversation below, and not all of them are my own.)
Here are some potential solutions. Note that most of this is not really female-specific; these are great ways to attract more speakers or ease people into speaking in general.
There was a lot of thought-provoking conversation around these questions and similar ones.
Here is why I personally believe that diversity on software teams is important. I’ll admit…as a girl, I was fortunate to attend “girls in math and science” events and such, so I grew up benefitting from diversity initiatives, but never truly “got it” until my first real job out of college. I worked on a team with a variety of different people, and among them were 3 people:
When I had a problem I was stuck on, I would go talk to each of these three people individually. Every time, they gave me at least somewhat different answers. Then, I could take the shortcomings of one solution and use information from someone else’s solution to solve it. With all of their advice put together, I was able to build the best possible software. That is why diversity is truly important…at the end of the day, you can use it to drive better business results.
Now, I realize that these three people were all men, but I would argue that we did have diversity on our team. In general, having the widest range of types of people on your team will promote more diversity. I don’t just mean gender, race, and age, but the things that are harder to see as well: introverts and extroverts, young people just out of college and single parents (who have to manage their time super-efficiently), people with different thinking styles, working styles, education levels, work experience, etc.
Finally, don’t forget that many of us develop software that is used globally or released publically on the internet for everyone. In that case, having developers that reflect your broad user base is a very good thing. Everyone brings their own perspectives to the table, and (for example) a single mom will understand best what a single mom needs from a dating website or a website that sells diapers online, etc. A diverse workforce creates better software and happier users.
Data from one of our Microsoft “Women in Technology” slide decks gives the top three reasons that women leave the computing industry. (My apologies…the source of this data wasn’t included in the slide deck; I’m trying to track it down.)
With the lack of role models being one of the top reasons, this suggests that having female speakers is very important. One participant made the point that the people who we hear speak at events and conferences often become our role models. Someone else suggested that it’s important for women to see other women speaking, to know that it’s something attainable for them.
Finally, Mike also brought up some data from the book Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell (around page 84 if you’re interested). Here are his thoughts, in his own words:
“In short, Gladwell is discussing the threshold effect - an observed effect where over a certain threshold, improvements have no effect. The example he mentioned was Michigan Law school looking at students brought in under affirmative action. These students did not place as well as other students on LSAT and other academic measures. When the school came under political fire for the program, they took a look at how students fared in life after college. It was expected to find the affirmative action students doing worse than the regular students, and the question was by how much. In looking at salary, awards, job position held, community contributions, and personal satisfaction levels, they found there was no difference between the groups. The students were all over the threshold, so the only thing that mattered was the experience and education of going to Michigan Law. I brought this up as a counter question to "does it matter women aren't in technology?". My view is that our methods of measuring qualification are being used far after the threshold is passed. It's often asked if a women should be in a technology role, speaking or otherwise, if she isn't the "most qualified" or "best" person available. This highly competitive nature is seen all over the industry, not just with women. We in technology are obsessed with perfection. The story above however says after a person passes the threshold, they are all equal.”
“In short, Gladwell is discussing the threshold effect - an observed effect where over a certain threshold, improvements have no effect. The example he mentioned was Michigan Law school looking at students brought in under affirmative action. These students did not place as well as other students on LSAT and other academic measures. When the school came under political fire for the program, they took a look at how students fared in life after college. It was expected to find the affirmative action students doing worse than the regular students, and the question was by how much. In looking at salary, awards, job position held, community contributions, and personal satisfaction levels, they found there was no difference between the groups. The students were all over the threshold, so the only thing that mattered was the experience and education of going to Michigan Law.
I brought this up as a counter question to "does it matter women aren't in technology?". My view is that our methods of measuring qualification are being used far after the threshold is passed. It's often asked if a women should be in a technology role, speaking or otherwise, if she isn't the "most qualified" or "best" person available. This highly competitive nature is seen all over the industry, not just with women. We in technology are obsessed with perfection. The story above however says after a person passes the threshold, they are all equal.”
We talked briefly about some other WiT issues as well, such as the importance of mentoring (remember, men can mentor women too) and how to get more women at user groups. Adria Lomangino discussed some really cool work that she’s been doing, teaching Alice at schools.
I’m sure that I missed some thoughts, so please add your feedback in the comments below! Thanks again to everyone who attended; it was a great conversation.