Why Technology Needs Women

It is also an interesting example of the power of weak ties and social networks - connecting two of the leaders of the tech world not via professional organizations or past business contacts (or even shared schools, non-profits etc), but rather by personal networks and friendships.

Even in the case of multi-billion fortune 500 firms, clearly personal connections and social networks are important.

I also agree that gender balanced environments are a good thing - especially when they are also a meritocracy - i.e. everyone there is clearly overqualified and talented.

Shannon

(for the record, I'm male - online the name causes confusion at least a few times every month)

Maybe his entry was written in a light hearted way, but I have to say that this position frustrates the hell out me because it sounds a bit to much like the beginning of an arguement for affirmative action would. I think that we can all agree that we need to put the past in the past, recognize where our society has failed and move forward by building a fully inclusive workforce based on merit and MERIT alone. To accept anything less would should be appalling to all of us, not to mention illegal.

Well, I hate to frustrate, but it'll probably leave you aghast that I'm still, unapologetically in favor of affirmative action, though not usually in the forms it has taken thus far. There are ways to do it well, though few are brave enough to embrace them.

I am, however, against the idea of compensatorily assigning white americans the status of property or chattel for four hundred years. So I'm not an extremist or anything.

Back on topic, do you think MERIT is being judged fairly if McNealy and Ballmer are both considered succcessful CEOs despite the the fact that they weren't able to get their shit together enough to shake hands on a deal for almost 20 years? Isn't it telling that women who've never held the CEO position can get things moving in one weekend when these guys couldn't get it together in a couple decades?

I think MERIT is being judged by people who think MERIT = SIMILARITY TO MYSELF. And curiously, nobody's appalled.

Anil...are you running for some sort of public office that you haven't disclosed yet ;)

Certainly not asking for an apology for what I consider to be a misguided philosophy. However the pperative word there is I. I think that we both agree that we are each entitled to our own opinions, even if yours is wrong. ;)

As far as judging merit, I can agree a with you that those who have passed judgment on merit haven't historically done an exemplary job (understatement of the year mine), however, I refer back to my original position "I think that we can all agree that we need to put the past in the past, recognize where our society has failed and move forward by building a fully inclusive workforce based on merit and MERIT alone" where merit does not equal SIMILARITY TO MYSELF, but is instead based on objective measures of qualification.

(As an aside, I'm glad to know that we can agree that as a Caucasian American I shouldn't need to suffer the wrath of non-Caucasian Americans for the rest of my days.)

Looks like a women commenter is needed to break up yet more bickering between men ;-) (That's humor...just in case it's not clear.) FYI, I am a woman working in tech.

I think Greg and Anil are actually in violent agreement.

Greg says: "I think that we can all agree that we need to put the past in the past, recognize where our society has failed and move forward by building a fully inclusive workforce based on merit and MERIT alone" where merit does not equal SIMILARITY TO MYSELF, but is instead based on objective measures of qualification.""

The only problem is that "objective" is squishier than one thinks. Merit has a lot to do with perception of value. People's values, assumptions, unquestioned belief systems and their social networks get in the way of pure objectivity.

A reporter from Salt Lake Tribune contacted me to find out why I left Utah to move to Silicon Valley. He appeared to be looking for a "women are not valued in Utah" theme -- a premise I did not go along with. The problem is much broader than about women; in general, people that think "different" than the majority are often not respected or valued, and thus perceived as being of uncertain merit or worse, a crazy "maverick" (using Tom Peters terminology). This is something I still want to write an op-ed piece on...why I really came to Bay Area.

Anyway, I recently talked to a stealth start-up whom was looking for input. They had shown their idea for feedback to dozens upon dozens of people and they told me no one had raised the questions I had. I found that really hard to believe. They thought for a moment and said it might be because they had only spoken to men. But I'd go a little further, they had only spoken to a very narrow category of men whom essentially had the same preconceptions, values, beliefs, training, etc.

I am strongly with you in the support for women in technology, but that doesn't mean I support affirmative action in terms of favoring 'disadvantaged' races/ genders... I think a great place to start is by teaching young girls to be confident with technology, and encourage them to develop their skills at a young age.

I recently taught a class on weblogs to a group of middle school girls from the Lilith Club a local organization designed to increase female interest in technology. It was great success.

The group was developed in response to a high school girl's essay regarding the feeling of inadequacy, and frustration she felt in the computer lab all through school- the boys had been favored when teaching technology, and the girls therefore thought it was too difficult for them, or not worth their time.

The founders of the club realized this was a wide spread issue, and decided to do something about it. If we can spread this type of education, we're in for success!

Hi anil, I had sent you an email last week, I'm not sure you got it or not, so I send it again. Please check it out! thank you and have a nice one! :)