Software engineering gender inclusion practices

It's not the pipeline, It's the System. June 23rd is celebrated as 'International Women in Engineering Day" #INWED Sadly the harsh reality, engineering colleges in India produce the highest number of women in STEM graduates/engineers and many of them actually do make it to the workforce. The real challenge is their retention and progression. With 2+ decades in tech and now consulting for tech companies on their Gender Equity Strategy, I’ve seen this challenge firsthand. The issue isn’t talent availability, it’s systemic. In most households, a woman’s career is still seen as optional. That mindset and bias bleeds into workplaces, shaping how women are hired, retained, and promoted. So what can organisations do, 1. Relook at org culture and design. Are your systems, policies, and leadership norms built equitably to support who stays, rises and how. 2. Representation matters, especially in especially in mid and senior levels, invest in retention and have hiring goals across grades. 3. Move from gendered to gender neutral policies. Eg. Maternity to Parental Leave Policy that supports all care-givers. Reframe workplace policies from “women-centric benefits” to equitable caregiving support that normalise shared responsibility and reduce bias. 4. Women in Tech Returnee programs - I've seen immense success in these programs, that offer companies experienced tech talent with a little investment. #Vapasi from Thoughtworks, #Spring from Publicis Sapient are two examples 5. Conduct Stay Interviews, Not Exit Interviews. Understand why women leave and what it takes for them to stay and grow and act on the inputs. 3. A Clear Career Progression Path with mentorship and sponsorship - Bias in growth opportunity for #WIT is real, if there is no intentional support to overcome these bias, talent walks away. 4. I Need to See More Like Me! There is a lack of role models. Accelerated Women in tech leadership programs, fast-tracking the leadership journey of high potential women are some ways to address this. 5. Collective Ownership. Gender Diversity in tech is not a HR, leadership or DEI responsibility. Make it the very fabric of the org. to drive shared accountability. 6. Data is not just diagnostic, it's directional. It guides us on investments to be made, unseen bias and where and what needs to change, it's your mirror don't ignore it. #Inclusion is a organisational capability and leaders are it's torch bearers. Their actions, direction and decisions every single day, signal what truly matters. The Women in tech, talent pool exists. The question is, are you ready to retain, grow, and lead with them? #WomenInTech #WIT #GenderEquity #DiversityInTech Diversity Simplified Image description: A newspaper article titled “It’s Not the Pipeline, It’s the System” from Times of India, Bangalore edition which highlights the gender gap in engineering.

 👉 From Checklists to Culture — Rethinking Gender-Inclusive HR Policies Many organizations tick the compliance box—Equal Pay, D&I policies, audits. But real impact happens when we move beyond checklists to intentional leadership and inclusive cultures. In my latest article, I break down actionable ways to strengthen gender inclusion:  ✨ Expand policies beyond maternity—include parental, LGBTQ+, menopause, and wellness support  📊 Set leadership accountability with audits, targets, and transparent reporting  🤖 Apply AI-driven hiring practices to reduce bias and promote equity 🎯  Enable flexible work models supporting every gender and caregiver  🛡️ Foster safe workplaces with zero tolerance for harassment and discrimination Global research from Harvard, McKinsey, Deloitte, and WEF is clear. It suggests organizations that lead on this, outperform in innovation, retention, and profitability. This is the mindset I believe in as an Human Resource Professional as well, "Learn.Apply. Impact".  📖 Read the full article: https://lnkd.in/gT8NhYEZ What’s worked for you in driving gender-inclusive workplaces?  Let’s share, learn, and grow together. #Leadership #HR #Diversity #Inclusion #GenderEquity #FutureOfWork Arunima Tiwari Kritibha Choudhary Manroop Singh Laxmi M H Daina Emmanuel Dhananjay Barve Seamus Ruane Jonakey Gupta, SPHR Hilda Sanchez Viktorija O'Sullivan Derek Martin Lata Chemudupati Suchandra Dutta Rajita Singh Aparna C Saraswathi Ramachandra (She/Her/Hers)

"This report developed by UNESCO and in collaboration with the Women for Ethical AI (W4EAI) platform, is based on and inspired by the gender chapter of UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. This concrete commitment, adopted by 194 Member States, is the first and only recommendation to incorporate provisions to advance gender equality within the AI ecosystem. The primary motivation for this study lies in the realization that, despite progress in technology and AI, women remain significantly underrepresented in its development and leadership, particularly in the field of AI. For instance, currently, women reportedly make up only 29% of researchers in the field of science and development (R&D),1 while this drops to 12% in specific AI research positions.2 Additionally, only 16% of the faculty in universities conducting AI research are women, reflecting a significant lack of diversity in academic and research spaces.3 Moreover, only 30% of professionals in the AI sector are women,4 and the gender gap increases further in leadership roles, with only 18% of in C-Suite positions at AI startups being held by women.5 Another crucial finding of the study is the lack of inclusion of gender perspectives in regulatory frameworks and AI-related policies. Of the 138 countries assessed by the Global Index for Responsible AI, only 24 have frameworks that mention gender aspects, and of these, only 18 make any significant reference to gender issues in relation to AI. Even in these cases, mentions of gender equality are often superficial and do not include concrete plans or resources to address existing inequalities. The study also reveals a concerning lack of genderdisaggregated data in the fields of technology and AI, which hinders accurate measurement of progress and persistent inequalities. It highlights that in many countries, statistics on female participation are based on general STEM or ICT data, which may mask broader disparities in specific fields like AI. For example, there is a reported 44% gender gap in software development roles,6 in contrast to a 15% gap in general ICT professions.7 Furthermore, the report identifies significant risks for women due to bias in, and misuse of, AI systems. Recruitment algorithms, for instance, have shown a tendency to favor male candidates. Additionally, voice and facial recognition systems perform poorly when dealing with female voices and faces, increasing the risk of exclusion and discrimination in accessing services and technologies. Women are also disproportionately likely to be the victims of AI-enabled online harassment. The document also highlights the intersectionality of these issues, pointing out that women with additional marginalized identities (such as race, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or disability) face even greater barriers to accessing and participating in the AI field."

I'm starting to see a pattern among non-men going into software engineering roles. We go into new roles, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, excited to to work in software engineering and learn from those with experience. Until we start asking questions. Quickly, our questions become too much for some of our coworkers and superiors. Instead of being seen as collaborative and open to feedback, we're labeled as overly-dependent, lacking confidence, and sometimes even considered unfit for the jobs we worked so hard for. The more I see this happen to others, the more it becomes clear that this is a form of bias that has gone unaddressed. From the time that we start, we are expected to conform to the way that men interact with one another. Instead of being valued for our enthusiasm and collaborative inclinations, we're expected to be more stoic and told not to ask so many questions. Our enthusiasm is seen as immaturity and our questions are seen as a lack of accountability. To survive, we take the feedback and we internalize it. We adjust our expectations of working in a collaborative environment. We learn to rely less on the people who initially said they would support us. But why? Why is the masculine way of working considered superior, the gold standard we should aspire to? If workplaces continue to reinforce these ideas, I believe there will continue to be low numbers of women and non-men in tech fields. By design, encouraging people to work in isolation is exclusionary. Some people learn and work better through processes like code-pairing and real-time code reviews rather than working in isolation and getting sparse comments on a PR. Some of these people are nonmen. Some of these people are neurodivergent. There is an element of community and collaboration that seems to come late in a software engineer's career. It seems to be the norm to be isolated and work long hours from initiation. Maybe- just maybe- one day some of your coworkers will see how hard you've worked and acknowledge your existence. This way of working isn't healthy for anyone, including men. Young women and nonmen have to look outside of their teams and organizations for support, and to be reassured that they belong there. There are great organizations like the Society of Women Engineers and Rewriting the Code that do just that, but it shouldn't be the only way. We shouldn't be made to feel like we don't belong just because we ask questions. Or just because we don't get it right away. The focus shouldn't be on our confidence or whether we have impostor syndrome. We should be accepted as we are and allowed to exist fully, without having to contort ourselves to fit outdated ideas of what a good software engineer should be. #softwareDevelopment #representationMatters #womenInTech #nonbinaryInTech