Engineering has struggled to diversify its ranks. Over the years, researchers have studied why women are poorly represented in engineering, acknowledging that it is not poor academic preparation that causes the lack of diversity. Instead, they blame the limited diversity on the lack of exposure to engineering and engineers, limited understanding of what engineers do, low levels of confidence in math and science skills despite good grades in these topics, and biases and stereotypes against women in male-dominated fields for the slow progress in increasing diversity among engineers.
Bias and stereotypes significantly affect women’s participation in engineering. Recent studies show that parents’ gendered beliefs may play a role in shaping children’s interest in pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). Other studies point out stereotypical views of gender held by adolescents, which likely affects their decisions on college major and steer female students away from STEM. Although gender stereotypes may influence who chooses engineering careers, gender bias significantly affects retention of women in the profession.
Joan Williams, a professor and founding director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, identifies four patterns of bias women commonly experience in male-dominated workspaces. Prove-it-again bias, tightrope bias, maternal or parental wall bias and tug of war bias.
Prove-it-again bias forces women to constantly prove their competency before receiving the respect and recognition given their male counterparts. Tightrope bias highlights the narrower range of behaviors accepted from female engineers. Maternal or parental wall bias affects parents, particularly mothers, when they are seen as less committed to their jobs after having children. Tug of war bias is often seen in workplace environments in which conflicts arise between people in an underrepresented group.
In 2016, the Center for WorkLife Law worked with the Society of Women Engineers (SWE) to study whether women engineers experienced these biases in their workplaces. Researchers were unsurprised to find women reported these biases were present, but they were surprised by their prevalence and how many women reportedly considered leaving engineering because of these experiences.
Women engineers most often reported experiencing two of the four types of bias: prove-it-again bias and tightrope Bias. For the SWE study, researchers compared responses from women engineers and engineers of color against responses of white men, the most prevalent demographic group in the engineering profession.
Identifying Bias
In the study, 61% of women reported that they must repeatedly prove they are as competent or better than white male counterparts to be respected and recognized. As one woman in the study stated, “I have to work harder to prove that I did not get hired/promoted to satisfy diversity criteria.” Almost half of women engineers in the study reported that other people often get credit for their ideas, and over half indicated they felt they were held to higher standard than their white male colleagues.
For women engineers of color, a higher percentage reported experiencing prove-it-again bias compared to white women engineers, highlighting the importance of considering race and gender when studying these biases.
Prove-it-again bias also encompasses the feelings of isolation many women in male-dominated workplaces experience. The existence of the “good old boys’ club” can have a chilling effect for those who do not fit the standard mold. One woman in the study described how her manager gathered the men in the office for an afternoon game of golf. “A man’s gotta golf,” he told her before leaving. Being left out of such activities is not just uncomfortable, it can put women at a disadvantage when they do not have the same access to work-related conversations and networking opportunities that such gatherings offer to those who attend.
The second highly reported bias experienced by women engineers in the study was tightrope bias, which centers on gendered expectations of what is considered acceptable behavior for men and women. (This bias gets its name from the tightrope women often feel they must walk in the workplace).
Women are expected to be helpful, modest and nice, while men are expected to be assertive, competitive and ambitious. If a woman behaves too masculinely, she may gain respect for exhibiting what many consider leadership characteristics, but she may not be well-liked, which can limit career advancement. If seen as too feminine, she may be well-liked, but not respected.
An example provided by one woman in the study shows how this bias plays out: “I raised my voice during a meeting and was reprimanded for getting emotional. But two male leaders get into a yelling match in the same meeting, and it’s no big deal.”
For many women, this tightrope makes it extremely difficult to be seen as leadership material. Women engineers in the study were more likely to report being given more “office housework” than their male counterparts, including party planning, scheduling meetings and note-taking. One woman shared how she was asked to get coffee in the middle of a work presentation, while others reported being expected to do administrative work like filing and paperwork because they are the only woman in their workspace.
Even more concerning, women engineers were less likely than men to report being assigned to high-profile projects or having the same access to desirable assignments as male colleagues, highlighting another way this bias effects the career trajectory of some women in engineering.
Women engineers also reported a flexibility stigma when this study was conducted. At the time, remote work options and flexible schedules were less common than they are now, primarily due to employers’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Pre-pandemic, some women engineers reported that colleagues and mangers had a negative perception of flexible work arrangements, but the pandemic forced many employers to pivot to such arrangements. As society exits this pandemic and workers can return to the office and children return to school and daycare, it will be interesting to see how employers incorporate flexible schedules and remote working into their policies and practices.
Combating Bias in the Workplace
Much of what SWE does is focus on how employers can mitigate biases that lead to unjust unequal treatment in engineering, but recognize that it is a problem that will take years to address. Some of these biases can be tackled by revising how certain decisions are made. For example, managers should evaluate engineers’ performance against transparent and objective criteria. Other biases require changes to workplace culture, and it takes time to change mindsets.
To ensure that everyone in their workplace is treated fairly, engineers should:
Learn to recognize bias. Everyone has unconscious biases. When a person becomes aware of their biases, they can better understand how they affect others. When we recognize when biases influence behaviors or decisions, whether our own or others, we can call them out and reduce their influence. One highly regarded tool to help people recognize their unconscious biases is Harvard’s Implicit Association Test, an online test available on a variety of different topics.
Examine how you interact with colleagues and direct reports. Do you ensure everyone has an opportunity to speak during meetings, for example? Are you open to listening to those who disagree with you? Are you considerate when scheduling meetings? SWE has heard from some women engineers that it can be difficult to maintain work/home boundaries, particularly during the pandemic when most people have been working from home. Simply being mindful of when work meetings are scheduled can make a big difference in making people feel included and respected.
Talk about unconscious bias in your workplace. There are several resources able to help create an inclusive work environment and an awareness among your team about the importance of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). For example, open your meetings with a DEI moment, encouraging conversation about your organization or perspectives on various DEI topics that let people increase their awareness and ultimately shift the organizational culture towards inclusion. Engineers often hold such routine briefings when discussing safety issues in the workplace. Consider DEI just as important a topic and worthy of a few minutes of discussion.
Interrupt bias when you see it taking place, not just when you are experiencing it. This is not always easy, but it can go a long way in promoting a more equitable work environment. The Center for WorkLife Law offers bias interrupter toolkits for use by organizations, teams and individuals to help mitigate workplace biases. It is also important that when you see biased behavior, call out the behavior, not the person. For example, if someone says something offensive, ask them why they feel that way. Start a conversation that lets you explain why you feel uncomfortable by such statements and helps them develop greater awareness of how their behavior affects those around them.
Women must be encouraged to pursue engineering careers, and just as importantly, they also need to be encouraged to remain in the profession. Creating an inclusive culture in engineering is vital to developing and sustaining a diverse workforce, and we all have a role to play in making it happen.
Roberta Rincon is the Associate Director of Research at the Society of Women Engineers. More of her writing and research can be found at: https://research.swe.org/