As I ponder my existence as a woman in the high tech industry, it is encouraging to see a few signs of progress. A guy I work with says that his college-age daughter, after a full circle exploration of everything from aerodynamics to veterinary medicine, has decided to become a software developer, and is very excited about it, doing quite well in her C++ class so far. In our conversation, I mentioned the fact that Frances Allen (check out her ideas on mentoring, networking and problem solving here) had in 2006 become the very first woman to win the Turing Award since its inception in 1966. See her picture at right - doesn't she look like she'd be interesting to know?I learned about her by reading a blog entry by Joyce Carpenter of ComputerWorld, entitled “They took anyone…even women” - a quote from the late John Backus describing the formation of the IBM team that created Fortran.
It is still a challenge being a woman in high tech. I often notice even in this day and age, especially when I am traveling on business, that I am the only woman in the conference room, or one of very few. My approach to resolving problems is a different than many (although not all) of my male co-workers, and I know this can perplex them. I am more collaborative, more interested in sharing information, perhaps more willing to listen to both sides of an issue before taking a strong stand. (It would be interesting to see if my co-workers really agree with these self-observations – you never know how you are really coming across). Is this because I am female, or just my personality?
My father was always urging me in my teens and early career days to be tougher, stronger, more assertive. And over the years, I have done this in order to survive. What has been the cost? Do people still share their true thoughts with me as much, or do they hold back to avoid what to them feels like an argument (and to me feels like a spirited discussion)? These days, do I talk too much and listen too little? Food for thought.
4 comments:
Hi, Lynn. Just wanted you to know that I've been following your blog. It makes me feel like I'm still getting time to sit at the table by the kitchen watching Mark concoct another delicious meal while you fuss about whether the candles are the right color or shape or whether the table is properly set.
I miss our table talk late into the night. John and I just had dinner outside watching the stars. He wants to take a trip on a space ship and I'm satisfied staying close to earth, watching the flowers grow.
Can't imagine that anyone thinks that you talk too much - you have so much to share.
Elizabeth
Thanks for this post. As a woman in high tech, I have puzzled over similar things.
Is this because I am female, or just my personality?
I'm going to say that it's some of both. As women, we are evolutionarily driven to be collaborators. Those that are so focused on the end product that they find relationship maintenance a necessary a necessary evil are generally more the exception than the rule.
But I also find personality similarities and differences are a big part of what works and what doesn't. In Meyers-Briggs terminology, I'm more of a feeling type than a thinking type and, as a result, the people that I most trust are those that can give me a feeling response to a feeling-oriented situation. (Interestingly, my most trusted managers have been feeling types as well.) Thinking types drive me bonkers in these situations, as they find such satisfaction in identifying and weighing pros and cons and rationally sorting through things that they feel to compunction to push beyond this into more feeling-oriented zones.
Just as it would be wrong to say that thinking types don't have feelings or don't know what they feel, it's not at all that I don't also rationally weigh pros or cons myself. It's simply that the logic of the matter doesn't give me same sense of finality as does genuine, natural empathy. Probably much the same way that my empathy (if presented without my thinking) would leave a thinking type feeling as if the process or our interaction was seriously missing something.
It's one of my challenges as a feeling type in a thinking domain. While I can think just fine, it may not appear so since it's not within my natural disposition to think on my feet. I need to go sit some place quiet and work something through on paper (or blog) in order to know what I think about it. Fortunately, my intuitive function is most dominant in my personality. So, the thinking types and I at least find common ground in architecting and putting details into meaningful order. That's probably what drew me to CS in the first place. Finally, a realm in which grand theories (algorithms) hold true and can weave beautiful structure out of silly 0's and 1's!
Thanks for your comments. Remembering that there are very different and equally valid fundamental approaches to work and human interaction (emotional vs. cerebral) helps explain some of the "impedence missmatches" I see at times in both realms!
Elizabeth - I miss the dinners too. Good, intelligent dinner conversation is too hard to find these days. That issue is worth a blog all by itself!
Post a Comment