POLICY MEMO

TO: Sundar Pichai

FROM: Amanda Xu
SUBJECT: Problems and Solutions to Gender Inclusivity in the Tech Industry
DATE: May 10th, 2017

Gender diversity is important in tech because is it proven to drive innovation, productivity, and
even sales/profits. More importantly, it is inherently just that the industry provides a meritocratic
space that enables all workers, regardless of gender, equal opportunity to succeed. However,
despite multiple benefits of more female representation in tech, why is it that barely one quarter
of IT jobs are occupied by women? Many unresolved issues exist in the tech industry that force
women to quit at twice the rate as men (Ashcraft et al., 2016).

Section 1 exposes three major problems that encourage gender bias against women in tech: (1)
gendered inequality in early technology studies– the “pipeline—to the tech industry, (2) implicit
biases against women in the hiring process, and (3) exclusionary “bro-culture” in Silicon Valley
that limit female career growth.

Section 2 discloses policy recommendations to get women interested in tech, for them to secure
jobs in tech, and for them to stay in the industry: (1) create a system of support for girls and
women to pursue interests in computer and information science, (2) increase reliance on
computer algorithms to help select qualified candidates regardless of gender, and (3) encourage
female networks and mentor/sponsorships within the industry to motivate career growth. All
three policy recommendations aim to make the tech industry more resistant to gender stereotypes
and more meritocratic.

Section 1: Major Problems that Perpetuate Gender Bias in the Tech Industry
Sexist Stereotypes Discourage Females from Pursuing and Remaining in Tech-Related
Fields in College
Taking a closer look at the pipeline to the tech industry, young women and girls are more likely
than their male counterparts to encounter systems of exclusion that discourage them to pursue
and to enter the tech industry.

First, young girls face gender stereotype that discourage them from pursuing interests in science
and technology in college. Widespread biases that underestimate their aptitude in science not
only limit young girls’ levels of interest and performance in science and technology, but also
helps females doubt their own intelligence and abilities. When told beforehand “men score better
in math tests than women, women tend to score worse. When told that isn’t true, the two genders
scored equally well” (Welsh, 2013). Perhaps such biases and early levels of unequal
encouragement explain why young girls and boys express similar levels of interest in science and
technology, but only two in ten computer science graduates are women (OECD, 2012) (Stafford,
2017).

Second, the post-secondary education system is rife with implicit gender biases that discourage
women from pursuing relevant studies in information technology. In other words, even after girls
decide to pursue computer-related majors in college, implicit sexism still exists within academic

1
spaces. Such biases continue to challenge female representation in tech. For example, academic
faculty tend to unconsciously favor male computer science students over female students. A
recent study found that college science faculty “rate female students significantly lower in
competence and hire-ability, recommend lower salary offers, and express less willingness to
professionally mentor women.” This study concluded that academic faculty, on average,
recommended females around 13% less per year than their equivalent male counterpart (Ashcraft
et al., 2016) (Moss-Racusin et al., 12). With a lack of support and encouragement to work in
tech, it’s not surprising that women are almost three times less likely than men to apply for
technical internships, an important fast-track to jobs in the tech industry (Ashcraft et al., 2016).

Implicit Biases in Companies’ Hiring Process Reject Qualified Female Talent in Tech
Interviewers sometimes make key decisions based on implicit biases that unfairly reject qualified
applicants. Thus, the interview process proposes another set of obstacles for women who wish to
enter the tech industry. Such problems occur at two major levels: the structure of the job
description and the analysis of the resume.

First, the language of the recruiting advertisement may use gender-coded language that make
qualified women feel unsuited for the position. Loaded words like “dominant,” “assertive,”
“ninja” and phrases like “we work hard and play hard” allude to the notorious “brogrammer”—a
supposedly masculine type A white male. Companies who look for “synergy” with such
personalities might translate to going out for drinks with other brogrammers after work (Peck,
2015). Compounded by the fact that female applicants only apply to jobs if they fit, on average,
at least 70% the characteristics of the job description, the structure and wording of the job
description can make a major impact on the rate of female applicants to the tech industry
(Zweben, 2011).

Second, interviewers host implicit biases that influence how they rate applicants. One recent
study found that interviewers “were far more likely to say they would hire candidates with
resumes that had male names rather than female names even though the resumes were identical.
This effect was exacerbated when women made up a smaller proportion of the candidate pool, as
is often the case in technical companies or departments,” (Ashcraft et al., 2016). Considering
men occupy more positions in tech than do women and 64% of employees tend to recommend
candidates of the same gender, it is not surprising that interviewers favor those who are like
themselves.

Overall, male favoritism in science and tech, combined with the effects of implicit biases that
filter qualified women in the hiring process, maintains a “mirrortocracy” that continues to
support Silicon Valley’s boys’ club (Brown et al., 2012) (Isaac, 2015).

“Bro-culture” in Silicon Valley Exclude Women and Limit Female Career Growth
Bro-culture normalizes explicit and implicit sexism that both limit female career growth and
decrease female employee retention.

First, explicit sexism encourages inappropriate behavior that make female employees feel
isolated, marginalized, and unsafe. “Nearly all the 200-plus women in tech who responded [to a
2016 survey] had experienced sexist interactions” such as being called too emotional or

2
aggressive and having “clients and colleagues direct questions to male peers that should have
been addressed to them” (Mundy, 2017). In addition, “60% had fended off unwanted sexual
advances (in most cases from a superior)” with 33% of them fearing for their personal safety.
Thus, it is not surprising that “undermining behavior from managers,” company culture, and
workplace conditions are major reasons why women leave the tech industry (Mundy, 217).

Second, implicit sexism undervalues female talent and limits women’s career growth.
Interviewers are more likely to promote John over Jennifer even though their resumes were
identical. However, if women were offered higher-level positions, they are (on average) offered
less money for the position (Welsh, 2013). Underestimation of qualified female talent is due to
bias assuming men are more competent and are better leaders. Thus, only 1 in 4 women in tech
reported “that their organizations support their leadership aspirations” and that they lack female
sponsorships and support networks (Ashcraft et al., 2016). Considering the damning effects of
workplace biases and lack of opportunities for career growth, women in tech receive 80% of
what men make, and men are 2.7 times more likely to be promoted to a high-level position
(Welsh, 2013) (Ashcraft et al., 2016). Thus, 32% of women “say they feel stalled and are likely
to quit their jobs within a year.” (Hewlett et al., 2014).

Overall, many women feel that their careers are being stalled by the bro-culture and conventions
in the industry. Unfortunately, “29.9% of female tech employees polled said they felt gender
played a role in their missing a promotion or raise, and 37.1% of female tech employees said
they felt their gender would disadvantage them in the future” (Wells, 2016).

Section 2: Policy Recommendations to Mitigate Gender Bias in Tech

Empower Girls and Women to Pursue Interests in Tech Studies
First, interventionist policies must empower girls from a young age to pursue interests in science
and technology. Outreach programs like Girls Who Code create encouraging spaces for young
women to increase their self-esteem and self-efficacy. Providing a space in which females code
together empowers them to pursue technical courses later in their schooling. “Follow-ups with
[Girls Who Code] alumni reveal that 90 percent are planning to major in computer science or
mechanical or electrical engineering in college,” (Sprague, 2015).

Second, more female role models in tech can help young girls and women undo the masculine
stereotypes of engineers in the industry. “Girls are often less engaged in computer science
because they have a negative perception of computer scientists and other technical jobs” (Hur,
2014). Increasing visibility for female engineers can encourage more young women to enter
technical fields. “When females are exposed to nerdy white-guy stereotypes, it discourages them
from [technical] fields…. [but] when young women hear about a non-stereotypical computer
scientist, their interest in the field increases,” (Welsh, 2013).

Thus, outreach programs like Girls Who Code can empower females from an early age and
support them to pursue/remain in technical fields later on. Combined with the encouragement
from female role models in industry, young women can better pursue positions in the tech
industry and become role models for the next generation.

Rely on Gender-Neutral Algorithms to Choose Qualified Candidates

3
Artificial intelligence and computer algorithms can decrease implicit gender bias in tech
companies’ recruiting process. Job descriptions should use gender-neutral language so women
feel comfortable applying for open positions. For example, Buffer, a social media platform, “
[replaced] the word ‘hacker’ with ‘developer’ in their job adverts [and] noted an increase in the
number of female candidates applying to their vacancies,” (Smedley, 2016). Software such as
Textio can screen job advertisements (and even LinkedIn messages) for problematic language
that may deter men or women from applying. Textio “[uses] existing research to help build its
screening software… [and] information from actual hiring and recruiting data to its algorithm.
As a result… it can uncover more terms that skew male which hadn’t been found yet by
researchers,” (Peck, 2015).

Additionally, algorithms can also screen qualified applicants without being influenced by
predispositions and biases. One software program called Gild “finds more diverse candidates
than employers typically do… It surfaces more engineers who are women and older and who
come from a wider variety of colleges and socioeconomic backgrounds” (Miller, 2015). AI aims
to check decisions based on implicit biases and hunches. This is important because such
algorithms help interviewers to fairly screen for talent and to make the entrance to the tech
industry more meritocratic.

Encourage Female Networks and Sponsorships to Better Navigate “Bro-Culture”

Developing professional networks and forming mentorships and sponsorships with senior-level
employees significantly positions women to better navigate the male-dominated tech industry.
Ninety-one percent of top female executives previously or currently have a mentor; once women
rise the ranks of their company, they feel responsible to mentor other women (Ragins et al.,
1998). This is important because once women gain footing in the company, they provide
opportunities to empower other women as well.

Sponsorships are even more important than mentorships because they put women on a fast-track
to career development. Studies have shown that when a woman has a sponsor to advocate for her
behind closed doors, she “is more likely to ask for a big opportunity, to seek a raise and to be
satisfied with her rate of advancement, “(Hewlett, 2013).

Overall, “breaking into the white-boys’ club takes more than individual effort. No matter how
fiercely you lean in, you still need someone with power to lean in with you,” (Hewlett, 2013).
Mentors, sponsors, and a strong professional network can empower women to better navigate
and challenge a male-dominated industry.

In conclusion, there are many obstacles that women in tech face even before they enter the
industry. First, young women lack of educational support to pursue STEM; second, implicit
biases diminish the perceived hireability of women in the recruiting process; and third, bro-
culture excludes women and limits career growth. Thus, policy recommendations must carefully
target the leaky pipeline to industry as well as industry culture (Lam, 2015). Early computer-
literacy programs for girls, gender-blind algorithms in the hiring process, and strong professional
relationships all help females to become qualified and empowered figures in the tech industry.
Hopefully, more young women will be encouraged to pursue interests in technology and become
agents of change in Silicon Valley and beyond.

4
 Works Cited
Isaac, Mike. “Behind Silicon Valley’s Self-Critical Tone on Diversity, a Lack of Progress.” New
York Times. 28 June 2015. Web. 7 May 2017.
Welsh, Jennifer. “These Are The 7 Things Keeping Women Out of Science Careers.” Business
Insider. 16 Oct. 2013. Web. 7 May 2017
Stafford, Marie. “Time for tech industry to end its bro-culture.” CampaignLive. 6 Mar. 2017.
Web. 7 May 2017.
Ashcraft, Catherine et al. “Women in Tech: The Facts—2016 Update // See What’s Changed and
What Hasn’t.” National Center for Women & Information Technology. Web. 7 May
2017.
Zweben, Stuart. “Computing Degree and Enrollment Trends.” 2010-2011. Web. 7 May 2017.
Peck, Emily. “Here are the Words that May Keep Women From Applying for Jobs.” Huffington
Post. 2 June 2015. Web. 7 May 2017.
Moss-Racusin, Corinne et al., “Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students.”
21 Aug. 2012. Web. 7 May 2017.
Brown, Meta. Setren, Elizabeth. Topa, Giorgio. “Do Informal Referrals Lead to Better Matches?
Evidence from a Firm’s Employee Referral System.” Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Staff Reports. Aug 2012. Web. 7 May 2017.
Mundy, Liza. “Why is Silicon Valley So Awful to Women?” The Atlantic. April 2017. Web. 8
May 2017.
Wells, Georgia. Gellman, Lindsay. “What’s Holding Back Women in Tech?” Wall Street
Journal. 22 Mar. 2016. Web. 8 May 2017.
Sprague, Kara. “Wanted: More Women in Technology.” McKinsey co., October 2015. Web. 8
May 2017.
Smedley, Kate. “10 Ways to Attract More Women into Tech Jobs.” Advorto. 30 Sep 2016. Web.
8 May 2017.
Miller, Claire Cain. “Can an Algorithm Hire Better Than a Human?” The New York Times. 25
Jun. 2015. Web. 8 May 2017.
Hewlett, Sylvia Ann. “Mentors Are Good. Sponsors Are Better.” The New York Times. 13 Apr.
2013. Web. 9 May 2017.
Lam, Bourree. “For More Workplace Diversity, Should Algorithms Make Hiring Decisions?”

5
The Atlantic. 22 Jun. 2015. Web. 9 May 2017.