In previous posts, I’ve discussed the need for greater gender parity in all forms of business, but especially in technology and finance. But, despite a clear need for workers, women are still vastly underrepresented in both of these sectors.
So, what’s going on here? Why does gender parity remain an issue in the fastest-growing industry in the US? Why does it become an even more significant issue the higher one climbs up the corporate ladder?
The Problem
Try asking the average tech executive about the role of women in their company. They will likely boast that their firm features an above-average number of female executives, and that they specifically search for qualified female talent during recruitment. However, if this were actually the case, women wouldn’t still represent just 34% of all STEM workers.
There’s roughly a 25-30% gap in perception between men and women regarding the perception of finance as a “diverse” or “inclusive” field. While it is true that these numbers are very gradually getting better, an ongoing gap of about two men per each woman is a large hurdle that we, as executives, should really be focusing on.
How we do that depends on each company’s individual dedication to finding and fostering the best possible talent for each role, regardless of gender. We must also encourage those women already employed by the firm to seek advancement.
The key to this is mentorship. While I’ve covered this topic before, the mentor-mentee relationship is more necessary than ever.
Mentorship vs. Sponsorship
Firstly, it’s important to note the distinction between mentorship and sponsorship before we move on to their utility. Both are equally important for any firm seeking to live up to the mission statements posted over their lintels. At their core, though, they are not the same.
Sponsorship is an excellent method for promoting workers that have demonstrated acuity and an eagerness for advancement. Recognition and support of this kind are most common in business. A good example of sponsorship in the workplace is when an executive recognizes a specific employee’s talent and success by encouraging them to apply for various positions at the pre-executive and executive level.
Conversely, mentorship takes a more direct approach to the advancement of staff through executive leadership. Mentors will select employees based on their acuity/interests and help them craft their career path from onboarding through promotion.
A mentor is generally an executive with the interest/ability to guide those selected employees toward their ultimate goals. Rather than select employees for advancement on a sheerly meritocratic or popular basis, mentors provide guidance, counseling, and crucial support for their employees from stage A to stage B.
The former is recognizable to anyone who has worked in business or technology long enough. However, the latter means taking a more “hands-on” approach. It’s arguably most beneficial to companies seeking to cultivate executives from within.
In my opinion, the thing that makes mentorship preferable is that it doesn’t just provide a company with the ability to promote deserving employees. It also gives businesses the ability to effectively train and promote the right people for any given position.
Competition is Key?
As invaluable as I believe mentorship to be, the concept doesn’t seem to be embraced as broadly as one might expect. There could be dozens of reasons for this, but I believe one of the most glaring is likely office politics.
Some leaders mistakenly believe that for the organization to maintain an edge over competitors, they should foment that spirit of competition within their workforce. The idea being that the employees who work to outlast or outsmart their competitors are the most qualified for those positions.
Sure, a little competition in the workforce can be a great motivator if used effectively. It can also keep employees engaged and functioning at the top of their respective game…for a while, at least.
However, problems arise when that competition is no longer friendly, and it becomes hostile or endemic to the workforce at large. For example, excessive competition in the workplace can lead to further problems like employee apathy, dissociation, favoritism, high-stress levels, and inter-office toxicity.
Why are Mentors and Sponsors Hard to Come By?
Even when toxic competition is not a bug in the workplace, we can still see discrepancies arise. Women and people of color are traditionally not sponsored for promotion as often as their white male counterparts. They’re often overlooked for advancement in general.
I’ll be blunt here. With approximately 9,600 jobs being added to the tech industry each month, and most of these jobs being filled by men, there is still a big, big problem that needs to be addressed.
Women and people from traditionally marginalized communities simply don’t receive the same recognition in this industry. Traditionally, they haven’t seen the same opportunities because that lineage of mentors reflecting people from their own communities hasn’t been there to support them. While no one expects this unfortunate fact to vanish overnight, we could do a lot more to promote cooperative ethics in our workforce.
Mentorship isn’t a magic bullet for the diversity and parity issues that plague this industry, but it is definitely a start. In my experience, mentors are hard to come by in companies that fail to see the value of cooperation over competition. A cooperative approach to hiring and promotion should benefit every individual involved. The trick to this is to make it worth everyone’s while.
How to Fix the Problem
One way to encourage cooperation is to make coordinated efforts at the business level.
We can incentivize managers to mentor new hires and/or promotion-seeking employees. For example, if an employee is hired to work in the marketing department, managers and executives could implement workshops or team-building events that promote mentorship as a means of advancement. In this way, managers are empowered to take a personal interest in the teams they build, and also single out individuals who display leadership qualities that would benefit the business.
Incentives could be anything from a jump in salary, extra PTO, or even paid medical benefits. In any case, the relationship between a mentor and mentee is organic and symbiotic in nature.
Other steps a business might take to improve gender parity and diversity are as follows:
De-stigmatize self-promotion at work
Not everyone is cut out for leadership, despite being a valuable employee who is happy with their job. Some people prefer to be team members rather than team leaders…and that’s totally okay!
However, your prospective leaders have probably already told you they want to climb the ladder; if not with words, then with action. They’re the ones who demonstrate their acumen and worthiness as a contender. Some might be reluctant to promote themselves and their accomplishments, but that’s really what they need to start doing.
There is nothing wrong with an employee who wants to succeed. Show them that you hear them, and that opportunities exist if they’re willing to stand up and demand them.
Help people build networks
Networking is crucial for anyone in today’s workforce. Unfortunately, though, many people are at a loss as to how to do it properly. or even where to get started. This is especially true in a post-Covid environment.
Mentors and sponsors are uniquely placed to help each one of their employees lift each other to higher levels of success. Networking with your own company could be a fantastic place to start building out your future leaders’ networks.
Hire more women and people of color
Frankly, as on the nose as this statement is… it still needs to be said. The swiftest way to achieve gender parity and increased diversity among your workforce is to deepen your hiring pool.
Women who are already in positions of influence within these companies are well-placed to help the next generation of hires into similar leadership roles. Improving the statistics of your workforce really only boils down to a little creative thinking, cooperation, and willingness to experiment with new ideas.
