RDEL #61: What subtle micro-inequities do different genders of software engineers experience at work?
This week we evaluate the subtle differences that different genders of software engineers face in their day-to-day work experiences.
Welcome back to Research-Driven Engineering Leadership. Each week, we pose an interesting topic in engineering leadership and apply the latest research in the field to drive to an answer.
Research has shown that diverse engineering teams improve team performance, foster innovation, and drive better decision-making outcomes. Yet, despite the well-documented benefits, achieving and maintaining diversity in technical teams remains a challenge. This week we review the latest research and ask: What subtle barriers do different genders face in software development, and how can leaders address these challenges to build better teams?
The context
The software industry has long grappled with issues of diversity and equity, particularly within technical roles. Despite efforts to increase female participation, studies by the National Center for Women and Information Technology (NCWIT) and World Economic Forum show that women still make up only 26% of computing professionals, and they hold just 18% of Chief Information Officer (CIO) roles in the top 1000 companies in the United States. Organizations such as SheTO and Society of Women Engineers are working to change that.
Diverse teams—especially those that include women—are known to deliver better outcomes in areas such as innovation, productivity, and problem-solving. Research shows that teams with a broader range of perspectives perform better than homogenous groups, making diversity not just a moral goal but a business imperative. Yet, many women in engineering roles continue to face subtle forms of bias—micro-inequities—that can undermine their contributions. These small but frequent occurrences, such as being interrupted in meetings or having their ideas attributed to others, can accumulate over time, leading to feelings of exclusion and disengagement.
The research
Researchers explored the experiences of micro-inequities and broader barriers faced by software professionals by surveying 359 software professionals, equally split between men and women, from various technical roles across the globe. They used a series of 30 questions (both open-ended and close-ended), and applied a mixed-methods approach for analyzing the results. The key findings from the survey found multiple areas where women and men had similar experiences, and where they were vastly different.
Areas where women and men reported similar experiences included:
Interruptions during discussions: Specifically, 16% of women and 11% of men reported being interrupted "very often" in meetings, while the majority from both groups stated it happened "sometimes" or "rarely." There was no statistically significant difference between the two genders.
Team acknowledgement: The study found that most respondents felt acknowledged and valued by their teams, with 77% of participants (both men and women) agreeing or strongly agreeing that their contributions were recognized.
Areas where women and men reported different experiences included:
Question discussions: Women were 1.94 times more likely than men to be skipped over on questions that, due to their expertise, should have been directed to them. While about a third of both men and women reported that this happened to them "sometimes," a higher percentage of women reported it occurring "very often" or "always."
Networking or social opportunities: While 64% of men reported never feeling excluded from networking or social opportunities, only 42% of women reported the same. Additionally, 30% of women indicated they had felt excluded from social opportunities three or more times, compared to only 11% of men.
Recognition of ideas: Women were 1.99 times more likely than men to have their ideas presented by others without proper attribution. This lack of recognition not only affects their visibility in the team but also impacts their ability to advance.
Harassment and sexism: Nearly 43.5% of women reported experiencing harassment in the workplace, while only 19% of men had the same experience. Additionally, 76% of women had either witnessed or experienced sexism, with over half of women directly affected, compared to 14% of men.
Assertion and aggression: Women were 2.43 times more likely to be told they are “bossy” or “too aggressive” when asserting themselves.
Decision confidence: 63% of women agreed or strongly agreed that they had the necessary support and authority, compared to 71% of men. Additionally, women were more likely to disagree on this issue, with 15% of women reporting a lack of decision-making support, compared to only 6% of men.
Finally, researchers asked the participants to share the areas where they previously experienced unfair treatment in the workforce.
The application
The study highlights several critical disparities that negatively impact women in engineering, including higher rates of harassment, exclusion from decision-making, and being overlooked in discussions for women in software engineering roles. These micro-inequities, though sometimes subtle, do accumulate over time, significantly impacting performance, job satisfaction, and career progression.
Addressing micro-inequities begins with awareness—actively observing team interactions and identifying subtle biases. This can be achieved in numerous ways, including:
Creating open forums for feedback, allowing team members to voice their concerns and experiences in a safe, supportive environment.
Encouraging diverse voices in meetings, fairly distributing responsibilities, and ensuring that credit is properly attributed
Adjusting leadership training programs to emphasize equitable decision-making and recognition can help bridge the gap.
Beyond the ethical imperative, the business case for implementing these changes is clear: diverse and inclusive teams consistently outperform their peers in innovation, problem-solving, and overall productivity, leading to better business outcomes and stronger team retention. It’s hard, but important work.
—
Wishing everyone a great Research Monday!
Lizzie