Focus on the female talent in the backyard
Sylvia Ann Hewlett | Saturday, 24 May 2008
The supply of talented women entering science, engineering and technology is surprisingly deep and rich. A study, which I co-wrote, to be published next month by the Harvard Business Review(HBR) shows that 41 per cent of highly qualified specialists on the lower rungs of corporate career ladders in these areas in the US are female. In spite of the challenges girls face at school and in the employment culture, a significant number conjure up the commitment to begin careers in science.
These women are becoming more important to employers. Labour shortages in these fields are worsening around the world. The European Union (EU) is projecting a shortfall of 20m skilled workers by 2030 - most in technical fields. In Germany, 22,000 engineering positions are unfilled because of a shortage of qualified applicants, with an estimated annual loss of $4.8bn to the economy. Not long ago, employers could turn to foreign-born engineers and scientists to fill their talent gap. This is becoming much more difficult. Rapid growth in Asia has created a reverse brain drain of professionals returning home.
To fill this skills gap, companies would be well advised to focus on the female talent in their own backyard -women with degrees who make it through the educational system and into careers only to quit in their mid to late 30s. The female drop-out rate is massive: 52 per cent of highly qualified women working for science, engineering and technology companies voluntarily leave their jobs, driven out by hostile work environments and extreme job pressures.
Five factors in corporate cultures fuel this female exodus. Many are turned off by male behaviour: 63 per cent of women in science, engineering and technology have experienced sexual harassment. Second, women are debilitated by the sense of isolation that comes with being the only female in a team or at a facility. Third, many are handicapped by the "mystery" surrounding career advancement: isolated and lacking role models and mentors, they cannot discern the path that will allow them to move upwards. Fourth, there is a divergence between women's preferred work style and the risky behaviour that is rewarded in these male-dominated environments.
One additional factor is at play. What I call "extreme jobs", with their relentless working weeks and punishing travel schedules, are prevalent in science, engineering and technology-based companies (in technology companies the average working week globally is 73 hours). Because women still bear the brunt of childcare and the care of elderly relatives, few are able to sustain these pressures. The cumulative result: women find themselves shunted to the sidelines into roles as executors or helpers, while men continue to occupy the more celebrated creator and producer roles.
So what to do? This research allows companies to pinpoint the "fight-or-flight" moment. Women experience a breaking point in their mid to late 30s because they hit career hurdles and encounter family pressures at the same time. Stepping in with targeted support before this happens could lower the female attrition rate significantly. Here are five ways employers can help women scientists and engineers stay on track in their careers.
Career development programmes that permit women to side-step the fight-or-flight moment, as offered by Johnson & Johnson's new Crossing the Finish Line programme; flexible work options that help women deal with family responsibilities and make progress in demanding careers (BT's Freedom to Work initiative is an exemplar); recruiting efforts that tackle isolation by bringing in, in one fell swoop, a number of new employees including a big proportion of women (Cisco has a new programme that does this); group mentoring that allows senior executives to reach out to a large number of young women at risk (such as Microsoft's experiment with interlocking "mentoring rings"); welcoming back women who have taken time out (next month General Electric in Bangalore will launch a programme called Restart).
No one pretends that these programmes by themselves will reverse the female brain drain. But they point the way and, if they were enlarged, could make a significant difference. In the US alone, reducing female attrition by one-quarter would add 220,000 qualified people to the science, engineering and technology labour pool.
..........................................
The writer is an economist and founding president of the Centre for Work-Life Policy in New York. She also heads the gender and policy programme at Columbia University
These women are becoming more important to employers. Labour shortages in these fields are worsening around the world. The European Union (EU) is projecting a shortfall of 20m skilled workers by 2030 - most in technical fields. In Germany, 22,000 engineering positions are unfilled because of a shortage of qualified applicants, with an estimated annual loss of $4.8bn to the economy. Not long ago, employers could turn to foreign-born engineers and scientists to fill their talent gap. This is becoming much more difficult. Rapid growth in Asia has created a reverse brain drain of professionals returning home.
To fill this skills gap, companies would be well advised to focus on the female talent in their own backyard -women with degrees who make it through the educational system and into careers only to quit in their mid to late 30s. The female drop-out rate is massive: 52 per cent of highly qualified women working for science, engineering and technology companies voluntarily leave their jobs, driven out by hostile work environments and extreme job pressures.
Five factors in corporate cultures fuel this female exodus. Many are turned off by male behaviour: 63 per cent of women in science, engineering and technology have experienced sexual harassment. Second, women are debilitated by the sense of isolation that comes with being the only female in a team or at a facility. Third, many are handicapped by the "mystery" surrounding career advancement: isolated and lacking role models and mentors, they cannot discern the path that will allow them to move upwards. Fourth, there is a divergence between women's preferred work style and the risky behaviour that is rewarded in these male-dominated environments.
One additional factor is at play. What I call "extreme jobs", with their relentless working weeks and punishing travel schedules, are prevalent in science, engineering and technology-based companies (in technology companies the average working week globally is 73 hours). Because women still bear the brunt of childcare and the care of elderly relatives, few are able to sustain these pressures. The cumulative result: women find themselves shunted to the sidelines into roles as executors or helpers, while men continue to occupy the more celebrated creator and producer roles.
So what to do? This research allows companies to pinpoint the "fight-or-flight" moment. Women experience a breaking point in their mid to late 30s because they hit career hurdles and encounter family pressures at the same time. Stepping in with targeted support before this happens could lower the female attrition rate significantly. Here are five ways employers can help women scientists and engineers stay on track in their careers.
Career development programmes that permit women to side-step the fight-or-flight moment, as offered by Johnson & Johnson's new Crossing the Finish Line programme; flexible work options that help women deal with family responsibilities and make progress in demanding careers (BT's Freedom to Work initiative is an exemplar); recruiting efforts that tackle isolation by bringing in, in one fell swoop, a number of new employees including a big proportion of women (Cisco has a new programme that does this); group mentoring that allows senior executives to reach out to a large number of young women at risk (such as Microsoft's experiment with interlocking "mentoring rings"); welcoming back women who have taken time out (next month General Electric in Bangalore will launch a programme called Restart).
No one pretends that these programmes by themselves will reverse the female brain drain. But they point the way and, if they were enlarged, could make a significant difference. In the US alone, reducing female attrition by one-quarter would add 220,000 qualified people to the science, engineering and technology labour pool.
..........................................
The writer is an economist and founding president of the Centre for Work-Life Policy in New York. She also heads the gender and policy programme at Columbia University