Yesterday evening, I was among hundreds of technology start-ups, entrepreneurs and VCs who attended TechCrunch #CrunchUp, an ad hoc gathering of Europe's entrepreneurs. However, when I looked out at the sea of over 300 of Europe's technology gurus, I noticed that I looked very different from the majority of the people there: I was one of a handful of women. The lack of women attending this event illustrates how few women work in the technology sector and how even fewer are involved with start-ups in general.
I have a master's degree from the media and communications department at the London School of Economics and Political Sciences, a department overwhelmingly filled by women students. However, judging by the number of women representing technology start-ups in Europe, very few are entering these positions, even though most technology start-ups today aim to take advantage of, or build new platforms for social media - suggesting that, if anything, these skills should be in greater demand. If women have the skills and education to enter into a tech start-up, then where are they?
The under-representation of women in these industries suggests that despite the distance women have come in achieving equality in the workplace and in universities, that they still aren't reaching the same level within burgeoning industries. This trend suggests that the "glass ceiling" still exists for women in the technology industry. The question is: why?
When working with a tech start-up, there is a certain amount of risk and uncertainty that goes along with being a part of something that is completely new. At the same time, there is opportunity, creativity and excitement that you experience being part of something groundbreaking. Do young women not want to take on the risk? If they are just as creative, hardworking and capable as men, then why are they shying away from these opportunities?
I am a member of the 'digital natives' generation; I grew up with the Internet and have only known an existence belonging to a networked society. Learning to use new technologies was part of growing up - for both men and women in my generation. However, even within a society that gives both sexes the opportunity to develop their skills, gender socialisation still continues - pushing women away from pursuing maths, sciences and technology studies.
There needs to be a change in the messages sent to young women - one that reinforces strong female entrepreneur role models. Instead of idolising pop stars, our heroes should be Steve Jobs, Jack Dorsey and Caterina Fake According to a recent study by blur Group that asked 1,000 entrepreneurs who they found most inspiring, female entrepreneurs received only 3% of the vote.
Some women may be shying away from the 'geek' image associated with tech start-ups. There needs to be positive messages that enforce the importance of entering into the these industries, or even forging one of your own.
While there are only a handful of women at the top of the tech pyramid, we must not let this imbalance affect who will become our future business leaders. Female entrepreneurs must be more visible, play an active role in mentoring young women, and recruiting them to join the wonderful start-up universe.
Follow Kelly Dern on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kellydern
Women need to be able to envision themselves as successful in a career path, and having successful women forebears makes this easier to visualize. Without them, both men and women may doubt the abilities of women and their chance of success.
As men and women relate differently to each other, it's important that women have a network of professional contacts to mentor them and back them up, just as men in the field do. These relationships are crucial to women's professional advancement, whether they work alone or within a large company.
Having role models and a network is not a concept unique to technology - it applies to every industry, from real estate development to government to restaurants... Interest is not the issue, and in fact, I find it hard to swallow the comment that "women" as a group "prefer" anything at all. I think to say so is to speak in meaningless generalities. Some women are lucky enough to have the confidence to pursue so-called "geeky" fields without caring what other people think. We should all be so lucky.
It seems to me the answer is obvious. Women CAN do well in science/math/technology, but they PREFER the medical, education and humanities sectors.
I have a 15 year old daughter who was the top math student in her junior high the last two years running and a straight A student. Teachers have told her she "can go anywhere she wants with math". However, while she loves math, she has zero interest in becoming an engineer (despite many teachers telling her to go that way) but instead wants to enter the medical field.
I think many women feel the same way as my daughter, and there is nothing wrong with being able to go into a field where you receive and enjoy positive human feedback.
There is no "glass ceiling" for women entrepreneurs because they are the owners of their own companies; otherwise, they are not entrepreneurs.
Dern jumps from "under-representation" to "glass ceiling" and implies sexual discrimination. But her lack of logic on this, and entrepreneurs and "glass ceilings" just negates the entire article, and her reputation as a logical thinker. Logical thinking is something required for understanding the hard sciences and for careers where people actually create something with technology. A degree in media and communications isn't one where one learns to program a computer.
As with Facebook, a good idea isn't enough to make a business work, one actually has to write and deliver the DNA for the company, and in Facebook's case, Zuckerberg provided that, while the Winklevoss brothers did not.
The comments below seem to indicate there is plently of skill and talent in the industry.
To say there is a glass ceiling for women is to completely miss the fact that it is a entrepreneur's passion and drive are the biggest reason their businesses become a sucess.
I would even go as far to say that in fact this story at best; shows a lack of understanding of what it takes to create a sucessful company and at worst: is a victim of a conditioned response, by accepting the very concept it is opposing and playing the age old sexism card.
Perhaps it is time to stop looking for something external to blame for the lack of representation and understand that the only glass ceiling for women entrepreneurs is that which is perceived and re-enforced by articles like this one. The only reason that women are under represented in this field is because so far very few have stepped up and made their mark.
So come on Girls if you have thought about setting up your own company, start taking steps towards your goal.
Who knows then in 10 years time rather than talking about Apple and Microsoft,
We might all be waiting to see what the next big thing from 'Stephanie Jobs' or 'Belinda Gates' will be.
Pink & Blue is the New Black and White
www.SeeingTheReflection.com
Saying that women are not in tech start-ups because of they are not inspired to take risks, is not justification for positing the continued existence of the so-called 'glass ceiling'--which refers to systematic limitations imposed by a dominant group. On this I take issue.
The rest of the article has some interesting speculation. I think we do need to note that the factors that steer women away from risk-taking enterprises may have much more to do with their personal priorities and the satisfaction they expect to gain from those choices. In contrast, we continue to push men to take risks, either by overt socialization or by more subtle cues that impact self-esteem.
We can encourage a girls interest in math and sciences, yes, but it is just as much a necessity to encourage men's choices for careers and life-paths that have traditionally been considered 'unmasculine'. Be carefult that you don't leave out the other half of this equation in the fun of writing for a 'woman's' section.
Incidentally, I work at a small tech start-up where our very-capable, risk-taking COO is a woman.
What women should be looking at is the number of upper management positions women hold in the health care or biotech industries, real growth industries where women account for 60%+ of the workforce.
Multi-media and technology is ever growing and to some the 'New Frontier," of the growing World. What Kelly Dern is saying, our new generation is producing more 'Tech Savy' people with the passion and ABILITY to learn more than older generations. (To Me) She's saying the involvment of these people are Majority Males.... and this is growing so fast, with the lack of Female involvement, there going to get LEFT BEHIND.....
As for multi-media, it's about a year older than me. I've gone from crib to graduate school since , where as multi-media proponents are still talking about it revolutionizing everything. Please, real-time television programmes on a wireless phone can hardly be considered revolutionary...given that the programming itself is so bad you would have to pay *me* to watch it, amateurish you tube is even worse.
Why wouldn't you assume women weren't just making different choices? Women working toward equality does not mean women should have to choose the same major's men do nor take the same professional path. Equality does not mean equal outcomes it simply provides for equal opportunity. If we divided people by eye color we would see disparities but that would not imply clear discrimination based on eye color. Different people do different things for different reasons. If you want to encourage women to get involved in tech, be my guest but don't blame men for them choosing not to.
Before complaining about why group X or Y or Z isn't in a particular field, perhaps one should research that field more. Heh, the only "lifers" at my job, or people who have been there a long time, are all like me... Aspergers.