Today (Tuesday, October 8) is Ada Lovelace Day. Ada Lovelace was born in 1815 and has been called the world’s first computer programmer. Since 2009, Ada Lovelace Day has been held every year on the second Tuesday of October to celebrate the contributions of women to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).

As a woman who comes from a STEM background, and whose dissertation work consisted almost entirely of computer programming, acknowledging the contributions of Ada Lovelace and all women in STEM fields is close to my heart.

As an executive coach with a personal passion to increase the number of women in leadership positions, Ada Lovelace Day has me reflecting on the work still to be done to achieve gender equality.

In 2024, women remain underrepresented in leadership positions at all levels. Leadership participation among women in STEM is even more challenging due to the lower representation of women in STEM fields. Here are just some of the statistics that demonstrate the underrepresentation of women in both leadership roles and in STEM fields:

  • In 2021, the proportion of women in senior management roles globally was the highest ever recorded but was only 31%, with women leaders more likely to be Human Resources directors compared to other roles.
  • In 2021, the U.S. Census Bureau found that women are nearly half of the U.S. workforce but only 27% of STEM workers.
  • The proportion of women in executive (“C-Suite”) positions at publicly-traded U.S companies fell in 2023 for the first time in two decades to 11.8%.
  • In 2023, women held 35% of tech jobs; this percentage is the same as in 1984.

This lack of female leaders, inside or outside of STEM, is often attributed to individual factors and choices, such as the confidence or desire to pursue new work opportunities, a choice of work-life balance, or even ability. However, one study of 2600 CEOs found that women and men had similar abilities for interpersonal, analytical, and managerial skills – yet women were much less likely to become chief executives. And the enormous disparity between the percentage of women in the workforce (United States; 46.8%) and the percentage of women at the highest levels of leadership (CEO; 8.2%) suggests other factors are at play.

Research suggests that the primary cause of women’s underrepresentation in leadership roles is “subtle barriers from cultural assumptions and organizational structures.” Herminia Ibarra, a current professor at the London Business School and former professor at the Harvard Business School, refers to this as “second-generation” bias, to distinguish it from an obvious, deliberate exclusion of women. These biases tend to manifest around a traditional view of leadership that values masculine qualities and behaviors. One study showed that when people are asked to draw a picture of an “effective leader,” both men and women almost always draw men. When women do not fit this image, they are seen as less effective. In one experiment, a fictional leader named Eric who offered new ideas was seen as a natural leader while someone named Erica who offered the same ideas was not.

Or, women are punished for not being “feminine enough” or for displaying stereotypically male traits – a “double-bind” that does not apply to men. IBM and Catalyst found that women leaders are perceived as competent or likable, but rarely both. The IE Business School in Madrid found that competent women must be seen as warm to be perceived as confident and influential at work. Competent men are seen as confident and influential whether they are warm or not. And male and female leaders are liked equally when behaving participatively; but when acting authoritatively, women leaders are disliked much more than men.

A lack of women in leadership positions and in STEM means that there are also fewer female role models and women-based support networks within organizational structures or in certain fields. Herminia Ibarra reports, “Multiple studies show that women are less embedded in networks that offer opportunities to gather vital information and garner support,” and that “men are more likely to have mentors who help them get promoted.” She also states, “When people are less embedded, they are also less aware of opportunities for stretch assignments and promotions, and their supervisors may be in the dark about their ambitions.”

While this lack of gender diversity in both leadership and in STEM is dispiriting, the hopeful news is that the case for gender diversity is getting more attention and traction. As part of my remembrance of Ada Lovelace, I will cover this topic in my next blog post.

Copyright © 2018 Neo-Strategic - All Rights Reserved