Women are underrepresented in IT college programs (Computer Information Systems, Computer Science, Management Information Systems), and the numbers of women in IT careers is declining. Many attribute this to the declining interest of women seeking degrees in technology related disciplines, a phenomenon dubbed the ‘pipeline’ problem (Blickenstaff, 2005; Camp, 1997; Soe & Yakura, 2008). Mitigation strategies have resulted in changes to IT academic curricula, the establishment of mentoring and role model programs, as well as the development of women’s networking programs to reduce feelings of isolation among women. The assumption is that if IT curricula are more accessible to people without programming backgrounds, more women may be attracted to the discipline (Sloan & Troy, 2008). Coursework that emphasizes the context and implications of the use of technology, may better attract and retain women students than ones that emphasize technology for technologies’ sake, (Stiller & LeBlanc, 2003). Mentoring programs and antiisolation programs help to support women in IT academic and professional careers (Simard, Henderson, Gilmartin, Schiebinger, & Whitney, 2008). However, despite these efforts to attract and retain women, the number of women in IT careers is at an all time low, and dropping quickly.
There is ample evidence of this decline. In 1996, the Information Technology Association of America reported that women made up 41% of the IT workforce, but by 2002, the percentage dropped to 34.9% (Hollis, 2003). An NCWIT report (Ashcraft & Blithe, 2009) gives slightly different figures (in 1991, 36% of the IT jobs were held by women, down to 24% in 2008), but the downward direction is the same. The NCWIT report also noted that women seem to face a midcareer ‘fight or flight’ moment, in which many of them opt out of the IT profession, in spite of indications that 74% of them were highly satisfied with their careers.
Many researchers in the overlapping areas known as STEM or SET (Science, Engineering, Technology) education have focused on the reasons for the dearth of women in these disciplines, either as students or faculty (Bystydzienski & Bird, 2006). Sappleton and Takruri-Rizk (2008) described the approaches of different disciplines to study the problem, and explained that the reasons for the under-representation appeared complex. Guzman, Stam, and Stanton (2008) pointed out distinct differences in IT occupational culture, which suggests that while IT careers are similar to SET or STEM careers, one cannot assume they are identical.
In research on women and IT careers, the issue of “opting out” by women who have successfully navigated finding an IT job is an interesting one. Some researchers concluded that the decision of women to start families explained this opt out (Armstrong, Riemenschneider, Allen, & Reid, 2007). Other studies demonstrated that men and women differed little in what attracted them to IT careers or what factors they valued if they persisted in them (McKinney, Wilson, Brooks, O’Leary-Kelly, & Hardgrave, 2008; Kuhn & Joshi, 2009). In an interview with Computer — World (Melymuka, 2005), Dorie Culp explained women’s attrition by saying, “Our research shows that work/life balance is an excuse women give when they leave so they can leave gracefully. But the reality of why they leave is the culture — the way it marginalizes women.”
Addressing similar issues for women in engineering, Faulkner (2007) asserted that it was not a failure to socialize women into the discipline that needed to change. Rather the discipline needed to change so that it no longer devalued women. In her ethnographic study of engineers in a building design engineering consulting company, Faulkner (2007) described in detail how the identities and practices of engineering professionals conform to (and not conform to) understandings of gender: “Thus, many men engineers cleave to a technicist engineering identity because it feels consistent with versions of masculinity with which they are comfortable” (p. 350). She argued that engineering culture can and should change, and that “as a profession [it] must find ways to foreground and celebrate heterogeneous understandings of engineering and heterogeneous engineering identities” (2007 p. 351).
Several empirical models examine the motivations of IT professionals. Schein (1990) introduced the concept of career anchors, and identified ten anchors that could describe people’s motivations and decisions in their career choices. IT scholars adopted this model to investigate the issue of motivation for technical work, finding several different and conflicting results. The number of motivators and their importance to IT professionals varied. Crepeau (1992) found that career anchors were independent of each other and that lifestyle and creativity were not relevant to IT professionals. Sumner, Yager, and Frankie (2005) found four relevant career anchors: creativity, autonomy, identity and variety. Attempts to understand the differences through clustering of the anchors created several more taxonomies of career motivators, particularly focusing on what women want (Ferratt, Enss, & Prasad, 2006; Ituma, 2006). Quesenberry and Trauth (2007) examined women in IT careers, and found that women had very different career anchors depending upon their individual context and that over time, women’s career anchors changed. Later studies by Trauth and Quensenberry (2008) examined populations of women in different geographic and cultural regions, finding that the context and socio-cultural factors played a significant role in determining choices women make in their careers. Trauth, Queensberry, and Morgan (2004) proposed that the theory of individual differences was a better framework for gender and IT. A framework examining personal data, influencing factors (e. g. education and life experiences) and environmental context (e. g. policy and economics, culture) allowed for deeper insight into a complex issue that had traditionally lumped all women together in the world of IT.
Research into mentoring programs and other institutional policy programs in IT mirrored other industries. Much of the research on mentoring focused on the benefits that accrued to proteges, as well as their mentors, at the individual level (Wanberg, Welsh, & Hezlett, 2003). In one recent study, Dougherty, Dreher, Arunachalam, and Willbanks (2009) examined career outcomes for male and female proteges with mentors, as well as men and women without mentors. They found that female proteges with high-ranking mentors received greater compensation than either males or females who had non-high-ranking mentors. Even those with non-high-ranking mentors received greater compensation than those without mentors. Clearly, mentor relationships could be of great benefit. Some negative aspects ofmentoring relationships are also evident (Wanberg, Welsh, & Hezlett, 2003), such as a lack of mentoring expertise and mismatches within a mentor-protege dyad (Eby, McManus, Simon, & Russell, 2000). Eby and McManus (2004) identified malevolent deception as another possible problem in mentoring relationships, including intentional deceit by the protege. Thus, while mentoring relationships could be beneficial to both mentor and protege, as well as benefit the organizations of which each individual is a part, mentoring relationships (like any relationship) could also be a source of negative experiences.
Other studies that look at women IT professionals showed how different social and policy support structures and accommodations opened the doors for female career success. However, the support for female success at work is a complex topic (Halpern, 2005). If women have flextime, they can work while their children are at school or asleep, and stay at home with sick children.
However, often women with flexible schedules work many extra hours, are perceived as not shouldering the same workload as their male counterparts and are passed over for promotion. Family leave, a great benefit to men and women, can lead to perceptions of weakness and liability. Women are reluctant to take advantage of these programs and for good reason. While legally there may be no bias, perceptually there is a stigma associated with leaving your job for your children (Kimmel & Ameundo-Dorantes, 2004).
This chapter seeks to explore the barriers to success that women with successful IT careers said they faced, as well as the areas of practical support these women IT professionals identified when they talked about mentoring programs and work accommodations given to women.