Several interesting themes emerged during the interviews with the women in IT. The women who participated in this study articulated several barriers and enhancers to their careers. The answers agree with Quesenberry and Trauth’s (2007) assertion that individual experiences, temporal situations and environmental factors influence how women make career decisions. It is also apparent that the obstacles identified by most women were related to organizational culture and work environments that were chilly towards them. They had to find ways to ‘fit’ into these cultures, even though they saw them as potentially career limiting. Women found ways to become accepted (being non-threatening, not taking things personally, working harder than others, etc.) or they sought work situations that were more friendly. These are really social accommodations made by women to ‘fit’ with the
IT culture. Women are good at this as they may have had experiences in accommodating culture throughout their technical experiences in life. Positive support structures that women identified mostly related to people, bosses, mentors and the ability to work with teams.
The topic of mentoring yielded surprising results. Mentoring programs were rare at many firms. At some ofthe large consulting companies, where mentoring was institutionalized, the results were mixed. Criticisms of mentoring programs often cite the lack of bond between the mentor and mentee as a primary reason for lack of successful mentoring (Wanburg, Welsh, & Hezlett, 2003). However, advocacy was taking place for many of the women in this study. Many women in the study had bosses or more senior colleagues who gave them career guidance, which sounds like informal mentoring. However, the relationship is clearly more than that. Several of the women maintained these relationships, long after they no longer worked for these bosses or these organizations. Most of the informal and formal mentoring relationships focused on the earlier stages of the women’s careers. Given that there is a large drop-off of women at managerial levels, mid-career mentoring might help women move into management positions.
The most common work accommodation made for women was family leave, even though this is an accommodation made for men too. When asked to describe other formal programs for women, very few were mentioned. Some women from large firms gave examples of formalized groups (e. g, groups for women or people of color) that their firms organized. Though these groups may diminish feelings of isolation, they do not give women access to male groups (golf buddies). Moreover, similar to the situation with formal mentors, women may not form a meaningful bond with others in the group. This means that for some women, these groups might not be useful at all.
Flex time is the second most common accommodation reported by women. For some women
this was especially helpful when children were small or ill. However, many agreed that this had the disadvantage of working longer hours and still having to face the stigma of not being viewed as dedicated to their work. Formal work accommodations or structural arrangements (Sappleton & Takruri-Rizk, 2008) are band-aids for the real problems that women face. Firms claim that they make accommodations for women, even though the same structural arrangements exist for men, but the underlying culture remains unchanged. Consequently, women must find informal ways to accomplish the same result. Women must establish their own informal networks for career advice and for finding new jobs. Several women, once established in their careers, found informal ways to gain flexibility without stigma. For example, several interviewees described days that they telecommute ‘off the books.’ These working arrangements were informal, between them and their immediate bosses. No formal policy on telecommuting was recognized. Again, these are accommodations made based upon performance, rather than on the basis of gender or the need for childcare.