Perceptions of Chilly IT Organizational Contexts
and their Effect on the Retention and
Promotion of Women in IT
Malu Roldan
Louise Soe
Elaine K. Yakura
San Jose State University
One Washington Square
San Jose, CA 95192-0244
1-408-924-3539
Cal Poly Pomona
3801 W. Temple,
Pomona, CA 91768
1-909-869-3241
Michigan State University
436 South Kedzie Hall
E. Lansing, MI 48824-1032 USA
1-517-347-7753
malu@sbcglobal.net
llsoe@csupomona.edu
yakura@msu.edu
ABSTRACT
Research on gender differences suggests that women lack the
personal characteristics necessary to flourish in male-dominated
IT cultures and subcultures. Organizational research suggests that
organizational cultures and climates can significantly affect
participation and employment outcomes, such as the participation
and promotion of women. “Women-friendly” workplaces exist
(Working Women’s “100 Best Companies for Working
Mothers”), yet female success in IT continues to decline. This
paper lays the groundwork for a study of organizational contexts,
organization members’ perceptions of these contexts, and their
effects on women’s retention and promotion in IT organizations.
Categories and Subject Descriptors
K.4.2. [Computers and Society]: Social Issues---Employment.
K.3.2. [Computers and Education]: Computer and Information
Science Education---computer science education; information
systems education. K.6.1 [Management of Computing and
Information Systems]: Project and People Management--Staffing: K.7.2. [The Computing Profession]: Organizations
General Terms
Management, Performance, Human Factors, Legal Aspects.
Keywords
Organizational climate, organizational culture, retention and
promotion of women in IT, careers of women in IT.
1. INTRODUCTION
Projections that women would excel in the gender-neutral IT field
encouraged many women to enter the field during the early 1980s
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that
copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy
otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists,
requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.
SIGMIS’04, April 22–24, 2004, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
Copyright 2004 ACM 1-58113-847-4/04/0004…$5.00.
[53]. Despite the job opportunities in the 1990s, the proportion of
women in IT decreased and women are now underrepresented
[30]. After the burst of the dot com bubble and the diminution of
the “new economy,” the 2002 U.S. Department of Labor Statistics
dropped both “computer programmers” and “computer software
engineers” into the category of “nontraditional occupations” for
women. Recent salary surveys show that women are less likely to
move into managerial positions in IT, earn less then their male
colleagues, and receive smaller raises [7; 15; 37].
Clearly, some organizations in the U. S. are better at attracting
and retaining women. For example, Working Women’s “100 Best
Companies for Working Mothers,” [55] and other media outlets
(e.g., Computerworld) list “women-friendly” workplaces. At the
other extreme, organizations accused of having “hostile” working
environments attract media attention, and in a sense, anchor an
imaginary list of “worst places to work.”
Research on women in academe provides strong support for the
assumption that organizations are not gender neutral. As Wajcman
[49; p. 54] has noted, “organizations are a crucial site for the
ordering of gender and the distribution of power…gender power
pervades perceptions of merit, performance, career choice, and
authority.” Even seemingly benign features of organizations—
such as formal structure—are not gender neutral [1]. Yet
identifying these features and assessing their impact on
perceptions and performance is not an easy task.
Researchers have examined the issue of gender and IT from many
angles. Is there something about women that makes them
unsuitable for IT work? Do they lack the biological and
psychological characteristics necessary to achieve? Or, are gender
differences actually social constructions [38] that have been
embedded into IT cultures and subcultures, affecting
organizational climates? Studies in both the social sciences and
management have tended to focus on outcomes, such as salary,
promotion rates, job satisfaction, or career aspirations. However,
there is little progress connecting these outcomes either to the
perceptions that women hold toward IT, or to the perceptions that
men and women hold of women working in IT. This research
initiative seeks to provide an opportunity to develop a more
carefully grounded explanation of the phenomenon.
Can it be that women find the climate in IT work organizations—
and educational programs—to be "chilly" or even "hostile” and
either don’t consider an IT career, or if they begin one, find it
inhospitable, and leave it for other work? Now that the IT job
market has shrunk and IT work is moving offshore, how are
women doing? Are women hanging onto their positions and even
moving ahead? Are women disproportionately represented among
the earlier waves of layoffs because they have not had the extra
time to update skills through efforts such as technical programs,
which are now being used to differentiate employee hiring and
performance review decisions [20; 31]?
This paper reviews research relevant to the study of the
relationship among organizational contexts, organization
members’ perceptions of these contexts, and women’s retention
and promotion. Based on this review we develop several
propositions that we expect to investigate using a multi-method,
multi-stage research initiative that takes an integrative perspective
on organizational context to assess how IT organizational
contexts, and individual perceptions of that context, affect the
work lives and careers of women in IT organizations.
2. BACKGROUND
This research initiative builds on literature from several different
disciplines to inform our understanding and interpretation of the
issues. We start by discussing several frameworks that inform the
conduct of multi-method research into social context, beginning
with Denison’s [11] definitions of organizational culture and
climate. We then review research findings regarding gender roles
in organizations from both literatures, and present propositions
that emerge from this review. Lastly, we outline a plan for
conducting this research.
2.1 Organizational culture and climate
Denison [11] captures the differences between organizational
culture and climate as follows:
Culture refers to the deep structure of organizations,
which is rooted in the values, beliefs, and assumptions
held by organizational members…Climate, in contrast,
portrays organizational environments as being rooted
in the organization’s value system, but tends to
present these social environments in relatively static
terms, describing them in terms of a fixed (and
broadly applicable) set of dimensions. Thus, climate is
often considered as relatively temporary, subject to
direct control, and largely limited to those aspects of
the social environment that are consciously perceived
by organizational members [11: p. 624].
Valian’s work [45] illustrates how organizational culture can be
used in conjunction with organizational climate to capture both
the evolution and current influence of a given context.
Perceptions of gender differences, evolved since childhood, shape
individuals’ perceptions of the competence and success of
organization members, as well as the norms existing in an
organizational context that determine the expectations regarding
quantity and quality of work. These perceptions, which Valian
refers to as gender schemas, are defined as “intuitive hypotheses
about the behaviors, traits, and preferences of men and women,
boys and girls” [45, p. 11]. We develop these hypotheses from
early childhood, as a way to explain the observable differences
between males and females. Because we base the hypotheses on
observation, we assume that men are better at certain professional
“masculine” careers (e.g., the law, managerial, engineering, IT
work), because they are instrumental and task-oriented. We
assume that women are better at “feminine” careers that feature
“nurturing, emotionally expressive, and communal activities” [45,
p. 168] primarily because women have a monopoly on
motherhood. When men are successful professionally, it is
attributed to ability, and perhaps their hard work. When women
are successful professionally, they are acting “out-of-role,” and
their success is not attributable to ability, but to luck, to the
relative easiness of the tasks they undertook, and/or to hard work
[54].
Women feel that they have to outperform men in order to be
viewed equally. Valian points out that this drive to perfection
means that the quantity of work that women complete is less,
which also feeds the perception that women are less competent.
She shows that female academics often expect to produce a
smaller body of research, even when they could reorganize their
time to do more if their expectations were different. This
argument suggests that women may be less successful
professionally because they act on the belief that women must
produce higher quality work than men to receive the same
recognition. Ironically, when women act on this expectation, they
produce a lower quantity of work, which makes them appear less
competent [45].
Martin’s work [26] further emphasizes impact of organization
members’ perspectives on organizational context. Based on her
meta-analysis of organizational culture research, she proposed
three perspectives that researchers use in their study of culture:
the integration, differentiation, and fragmentation perspectives.
Martin’s work reminds us that individuals can perceive cultures
from many perspectives simultaneously—not only based on their
affiliation to the organization being studied, but also based on
their affiliations to one or more cultures and/or subcultures related
to external professional affiliations, organizational positions, and
the like. This provides a powerful explanation for situations where
individuals who may share the same subculture based on gender
may not necessarily perceive or react to a given organizational
context in the same manner because of their simultaneous
membership in other subcultures.
2.2 Evolution of IT cultures
In this section, we review findings regarding societal, cultural,
and individual factors related to the evolution of the current IT
contexts in which women work and propose several propositions
that will guide our research. IT contexts may include companies
in the IT industry, or IT support departments within non-IT
companies. In either case, IT work generally falls into managerial,
technical, and support levels of responsibility (parallel to Schein’s
1996 executive, engineering, and operational subcultures). At the
managerial level, women’s roles may be executives, managers, or
technical leads. At the technical level, typical women’s roles may
include that of programmers, software engineers, or network
administrators. At the support level, women’s roles may be
located in computer operations, at the helpdesk, or sometimes in
support centers [4], which have earned the title “pink collar
ghettos” [24].
We also take into account external forces that are key influencers
of the evolution of organizational context. These extraorganizational “feeder” cultures shape organizational contexts
through their influence on different groups within the
organization [26]. Feeder cultures operate even at the level of
nations or countries. Symbolic interactionists would view
perceptions of psychological and biological gender differences as
social constructions [40] that are embedded in cultures and
subcultures that nurture and influence perceptions, for example, of
women in IT. The social construction of gender differences is
evident at the level of national cultures. In “feminine” cultures
(e.g., Denmark), gender roles are not differentiated, whereas in
“masculine” cultures (e.g., Japan), gender roles are highly
differentiated [2]. In New Zealand women emigrants from former
Soviet Republics believed women belonged in IT jobs while
native New Zealanders believed women belonged at home [40].
Much of the research on women in IT has investigated gender
differences, from children’s use of computing, to IT education,
and on to work situations. Findings have noted the preponderance
of gaming software directed at boys [54], the competitive,
individualist hacker mentality [42]; the perception of computer
geeks as obsessive and nonsocial [43; 51]; and the appeal of
computing to male “tinkerers” [12]. In IT education, the lack of
visible female role models, female faculty, faculty support, and a
female peer support group discourages female participation [10;
48]. Once women enter the IT field, they are often steered into
administrative jobs, and not promoted into higher technical jobs.
One of the primary themes in the gender differences literature is
the level of male domination in feeder cultures [23; 18; 28; 39].
Wright [56] argues that the “engineering culture” of IT work has
an adverse impact on the participation and progress of women,
because a culture that develops in a male-dominated environment
is necessarily one in which males have the advantage. Male
domination fosters the aberrant behaviors attached to obsessive
computer usage. Weizenbaum [51] described the compulsive
computer users who exist only through their computers. The
“hacker” culture, which embodies the “open systems” subculture
but not the nefarious “cracker” subculture [19], has been nurtured
in Computer Science departments [33] where many IT workers
gain their early socialization. The merging of technology and
culture into “technoculture” is personified by Wired magazine, a
publication that glorifies gadgets, gear, and a hip, high technology
lifestyle [21]. These male-dominated themes suggest our first
proposition:
Proposition 1. The perception that various elements
(gaming software, hacker fraternities, IT education,
and/or IT promotion policies) of IT culture are maleoriented, leads to the perception that IT organizational
contexts are unfriendly towards women.
2.3 Perceptions of Organizational Climates
"Chilly" is a term that has been used primarily to describe
unfriendly academic climates for women [3; 5; 6; 9; 13; 17; 34].
We argue that in the IT context, the "masculinity" of IT tends to
make the climate “chilly.” A chilly climate for women in the IT
workforce might be characterized by extended work schedules
without consideration for a normal life [27; 33]; the “open
systems” mentality that glorifies individual “passionate”
technology innovation [19] rather than teamwork; the emphasis
on and rewarding of technological rather than social skills [33];
the delicate paths that a lone woman on a male team must
navigate to be successful [14]; and the double standard toward
behaviors required for success, in which assertiveness in men is
expected behavior, but assertiveness in women is labeled “bitchy”
and unfeminine [14].
Proposition 2. The larger percentage of men rather
than women being hired and promoted in IT
organizations leads to perceptions that the
organizational context is unfriendly towards women.
Proposition 3. The male orientation of IT
organizations coupled with extended work schedules,
emphasis on individual innovation rather than
teamwork, emphasis on technological rather than
social skills, the lack of female colleagues, and the
double standards towards success behaviors lead to
women’s perceptions that the organizational context
of IT is chilly.
It is important to realize that this concept of chilliness has an
inherently subjective dimension. Different people will perceive
and experience the same environment differently [11; 16]. Even in
the legal context, the determination of what constitutes a "hostile
environment" is subject to interpretation [57]; yet one jurisdiction
adopted a "reasonable victim" standard, which analyzes
harassment from the victim's point of view (Ellison v. Brady, 924
F.2d 872, 9th Cir. 1991), noting "we believe that a sex-blind
reasonable person standard tends to be male biased and tends to
systematically ignore the experiences of women.” Other legal
commentators have noted that developing a "reasonable woman"
standard might be more efficacious [25]. Generally, there will be a
greater similarity in the perceptions of the “chill” level of an
organizational context among women at different levels
(management, technical, support) of an IT organization than
among male and female employees within the same level. This
chilly environment is also likely to affect the promotion and
turnover of women.
Proposition 4. A woman’s perceptions of the “chill”
level of a given IT organizational context affect the
length of her participation in that organization.
Proposition 5. IT organizations that are perceived as
chilly or hostile towards women have lower
percentages of women in their employee rosters.
2.4 Outcomes of Chilly Contexts
Gender studies reveal perceptions that women are good at certain
tasks. Women are better suited to the “soft” side of IT—human
relationships, understanding, and communication, especially with
users [29]. Although these skills are supposed to be of utmost
importance in IT, they are valued less when women do them well
because they are “natural” for women and not an achievement
[29]. Because women are perceived as better at attention to detail
than at technical work, they are encouraged to move into jobs in
administration, documentation, and training [29; 32]. Women are
considered less assertive than men are [29], with the assumption
that assertiveness is better. Female inferiority is evident when
women base technology adoption decisions on social pressure and
concerns about the ease of learning and using the technology,
while men base their decisions on “macho” reasons: the
usefulness of the technology and its effects on their behavior [46;
47]. The underlying conclusion is that women are insecure and
less technically savvy. Little wonder that studies of perceptions of
gender characteristics and managerial work characteristics have
shown that both men and women equate characteristics of their
own sex with managerial characteristics; and while females equate
male characteristics with managerial characteristics, males do not
equate female characteristics with managerial characteristics [36].
Proposition 6. The perception that women’s skills are
inferior or less applicable than men’s skills in an IT
organization leads to perceptions that women are less
capable than men at:
6a. handling managerial responsibilities
6b. handling advanced technological responsibilities.
Proposition 7. The perception that women are less
capable of handling managerial responsibilities than
men leads to fewer promotions of women than men
into
7a. managerial positions in IT organizations
7b. advanced technical lead positions.
One of the most widely held explanations for genderdifferentiated IT careers is that women have to manage home and
children. Thus, women are not able to work the long hours
required to do the job and to keep up with technology [48; 50].
Women are more constrained by their physical locations and not
freely able to travel and relocate [32]. This perception translates
to pay differences: on Wall Street, male IT workers earned 50%
more than females, because women could not take the direct sales
jobs that required travel and a large time commitment [41]. These
problems are worsening in the declining job market. A recent
survey [8] revealed that women feel more stressed due to the
emotional demands of work, 9/11 stresses, the dot-com bust,
increased workload demands resulting from large-scale layoffs of
coworkers, and uncertainty about the future. Understandably,
women value public policy and employers that promote childcare,
maternity leaves, equal opportunity, enforcement of equal
opportunity and sexual harassment laws, and employee training
[40].
Proposition 8. Women in IT who perceive they have a
larger share than men of home and childcare
responsibilities choose IT career options that require:
8a. shorter work schedules
8b. less frequent travel and/or re-location.
Proposition 9. The perception that women cannot
provide their organizations with the same time and
location flexibility as men leads to perceptions that
women are less valuable to an IT organization than
men are.
Proposition 10. Conflicting home and work demands
lead to greater stress for women than for men.
Professional organizations and user groups formed around
technologies are important carriers of IT culture. They help IT
workers identify with and keep current with a particular
technology, and provide networks necessary for job opportunities.
IT workers differentiate themselves and legitimate their technical
skill levels increasingly through technology certifications. Large
companies, such as Microsoft and Cisco, promote certification
programs that require passing an examination after attending
training (either in a classroom or on-line) or self-study. In the
recently declining IT job market, employers are using certification
to evaluate employee performance, as an indicator of commitment
to the job and evidence that the employee’s job skills are current
[22]. If women can obtain this independent certification of skills,
they should be achieving the same success as men with similar
certifications. If women have less time for extra skills because of
their commitments to home and family, they are less likely to take
advantage of this opportunity. Certifications are useful for
providing objective, standardized assessment that can aid in
identifying the best candidates to hire or promote—regardless of
his/her gender.
Proposition 11. Women are less likely than men to
earn technical certifications.
2.5 Summary
The research literature suggests that organizational culture and
climate can significantly affect women's participation and
employment outcomes. And while it has never been specifically
studied, it seems reasonable to hypothesize that some features of
the male-dominated IT subculture would be perceived as
distinctly inhospitable to women. Ultimately, the question we aim
to answer is how the climates emerging out of the evolution and
interaction of various cultural factors affect women's participation
in the IT workforce.
3. PROPOSED RESEARCH DESIGN
The organizational culture tradition was built on ethnographies.
Organizational climate studies, on the other hand, traditionally use
survey and case study research methodologies, and climate
constructs are assumed to be generalizable across organizations
because they measure organizational characteristics (e.g., size)
and member perceptions. While these distinctions have become
blurred and contested over time, there is a strong—albeit
controversial—case for incorporating methods from both
traditions in studies of organizational context [11].
We expect to employ ethnographic methods to develop grounded
descriptions of the context of IT work organizations, the elements
that influence perceived chilliness, and the outcomes of import to
the retention and promotion of women. The ethnography will
include informants from all levels of companies within the IT
industry as well as IT support departments in companies in non-IT
industries (e.g. retail).
Subsequently, we expect to use a combination of survey and case
study methods to test the results gleaned from our ethnographic
work. In particular, we plan to test the extent to which existing
survey measures of culture/climate capture (or fail to capture) the
constructs identified in the first phase. In this way, our findings
will link back to the larger literature on organizational culture and
climate, as well as gender in organizations. The result should be a
set of measurable, validated constructs that organization
researchers and members alike can use to diagnose and adjust the
comfort levels of their contexts to make them more amenable to
women.
The findings of this study will add to our knowledge of the
participation of women in IT organizations. Studies in both the
social sciences and management have tended to focus on
outcomes—such as salary, promotion rates, job satisfaction or
career aspirations—but there has been little progress on
connecting these findings to perceptions of the IT workplace, or
the ways in which women are perceived in the IT workplace. As
Valian’s [45] study shows, misperceptions of workplace
conditions and expectations can have significant impacts on
women’s career trajectories. It is imperative that we build a
comprehensive, well-grounded body of work that links
organizational contexts, perceptions of such contexts, and impacts
on women’s careers. Further, as researchers and teachers who
have the opportunity to influence women and men at various
stages in their IT careers, such findings would provide a solid
foundation upon which to base our teaching and
recommendations. This research is key to building this body of
work.
4. REFERENCES
[1] Acker, J. Doing Comparable Worth: Gender, Class, and Pay
Equity, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, 1989.
[2] Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E., and Fugate, M. All in a
Day’s Work: Boundaries and Micro Role Transitions,
Academy of Management Review (25:3), July 2000, 472-492.
[3] Bartlett, K., and O'Barr, J. The Chilly Climate on College
Campuses: An Expansion of the ‘Hate Speech’ Debate, Duke
Law Journal (1990), 1990, 574-586.
[4] Bell, V. A Female Ghetto? Women’s Careers in Call Centres,
Human Resource Management Journal (12:4), 2002. 51-67.
[15] Goodridge E. Salary Gap Still Exists for Women in IT,
InformationWeek. 2002. URL:
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?ar
ticleID=6501879
[16] Guion, R. A Note on Organizational Climate, Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance (9), 1973, 120-125.
[17] Hall, R. The Classroom Climate: A Chilly One for Women?
Project on the Status of Women of the Association of
American Colleges, Washington, DC, 1982.
[18] Hedberg, B., and Mumford, E. The Design of Computer
Systems: Man's Vision of Man as an Integral Part of the
System Design Process, in Human Choice and Computers,
E. Mumford, and H. Sackman (eds.), Elsevier, New York,
1975, 31-59.
[19] Himanen, P. The Hacker Ethic and the Spirit of the
Information Age, Random House, New York, 2001.
[20] ITAA 2003 Workforce Survey. Presented at the National IT
Workforce Convocation, Arlington VA, May 5, 2003.
URL:http://www.itaa.org/workforce/studies/03execsumm.pdf
[21] Johnson, S. Interface Culture: How New Technology
Transforms the Way We Create and Communicate, Basic
Books, San Francisco, 1997.
[5] Bento, R. When Good Intentions are not Enough:
Unintentional Subtle Discrimination against Latinas in the
Workplace, in Subtle Sexism: Current Practice and
Prospects for Change, N. Benokraitis (ed.), Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA, 1997, 95-116.
[22] Kelly, L. Certification Still Pays, Says Study, 2003. URL:
http://www.vnunet.com/News/1139025.
[6] Blakemore, J., Switzer, J., DiLorio, J., and Fairchild, D.
Exploring the Campus Climate for Women Faculty, in Subtle
Sexism: Current Practice and Prospects for Change, N.
Benokraitis (ed.), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1997, 54-71.
[24] Kouzmin, A., Korac-Kakabadse, N., and Korac-Kakabadse,
A. Globalization and Information Technology: Vanishing
Social Contracts, the ’Pink Collar’ Workforce and Public
Policy Challenges, Women in Management Review (14:6),
1999, 230.
[7]
BrainBench 2002 IT Salary Report, URL:
http://www.brainbench.com/xml/bb/landing/reports/itsalary2
002.xml.
[8] Buckley, C. Stressed-out: Job Pressures Rising for Women,
Study Says, The Miami Herald, January 24, 2003.
[9] ChillyCollective (Ed.). Breaking anonymity: The Chilly
Climate for Women Faculty, Wilfrid Laurier University
Press, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 1995.
[10] Cohoon, J. M. Toward Improving Female Retention in the
Computer Science Major, Communications of the ACM
(44:5), May 2001, 108-115.
[11] Denison, D. R. What is the Difference between
Organizational Culture and Organizational Climate? A
Native’s Point of View on a Decade of Paradigm Wars,
Academy of Management Review (21:3), July 1996, 619-55.
[12] De Palma, P. Why Women Avoid Computer Science,
Communications of the ACM (44:6), June 2001, 27-29.
[13] Freyd, J. References on Chilly Climate for Women Faculty in
Academe, URL: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~jqj/interpub/css/chillyclimate.html
[14] Gherardi, S. Gender, Symbolism and Organizational
Cultures, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1995.
[23] Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., and Eccles, J. S. Pool Halls, Chips,
and War Games: Women in the Culture of Computing,
Psychology of Women Quarterly (9), 1985, 451-462.
[25] Lehane, E. Who is the Reasonable Plaintiff and What Does
She Mean for the Rest of Us? Women's Rights Law Reporter
(19:3), 1998, 229-236.
[26] Martin, J. Organizational Culture: Mapping the Terrain,
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2002.
[27] Meyerson, D. E., and Fletcher, J. K. A Modest Manifesto for
Shattering the Glass Ceiling, Harvard Business Review,
January-February 2000, 126-136.
[28] Murray, F. A Separate Reality: Science, Technology and
Masculinity, in Gendered by Design? Information
Technology and Office Systems, E. Green, J. Owen, and D.
Pain (eds.), Taylor and Francis, Washington, D.C., 1998.
[29] Nielsen, S. H., von Hellens, L. A., Greenhill, A. and Pringle,
R. Collectivism and Connectivity: Culture and Gender in
Information Technology, Proceedings of the 1997 ACM
SIGCPR Conference on Computer Personnel Research,
2003, 9-13.
[30] NSF Press Release, 2000. URL:
http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/press/00/pr0040.htm
[31] Pace, C. IT Salary Increases Affected by Recession, Gender
and Certification, 2003. URL:
http://www.itcareersource.com/columns/feb_02/pace.html
[32] Pantelli, A., Stack, J., and Ramsay, H. Gender and
Professional Ethics in the IT Industry, Journal of Business
Ethics 22(1), 1999, 51-61.
[33] Rasmussen, B., and Håpnes, T. Excluding Women from the
Technologies of the Future? A Case Study of the Culture of
Computer Science, in Sex/Machine: Readings in Culture,
Gender, and Technology, P. D. Hopkins (ed.), Indiana
University Press, Bloomington, 1998.
URL: http://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/nontra2002.htm
[45] Valian, V. Why so slow? The advancement of women. MIT
Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998.
[46] Venkatesh, V., and Morris, M. G. Why Don’t Men Ever Stop
to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and their
Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior, MIS
Quarterly (24:1), March 2000, 115-39.
[34] Sandler, B. The Campus Climate Revisited: Chilly for
Women Faculty, Administrators, and Graduate Students,
Project on the Status and Education of Women of the
Association of American Colleges, Washington DC, 1986.
[47] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., and Ackerman, P. L. A
Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Differences in
Individual Technology Adoption Decision-Making
Processes, Organization Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, (83:1), September 2000, 33-60.
[35] Schein, E. H. Three Cultures of Management: The Key to
Organizational Learning, Sloan Management Review (38:1),
Fall 1996, 9-21.
[48] von Hellens, L., and Nielsen, S. Australian Women in IT,
Communications of the ACM (44:7), July 2001, 46-52.
[36] Schein, V. E. and Mueller, R. Sex Role Stereotyping and
Requisite Management Characteristics: A Cross Culture
Look, Journal of Organizational Behavior (13), 1992, 439447.
[37] Schurr, A. Salary Gains Were Small in 2002. Network World
Fusion. 2003.
URL:http://www.nwfusion.com/newsletters/careers/2003/02
24car1.html
[49] Wajcman, J. Managing Like a Man: Women and Men in
Corporate Management, Pennsylvania State University
Press, University Park, PA, 1998.
[50] Wajcman, J. and Martin, B. Narratives of Identity in Modern
Management: The Corrosion of Gender Difference?
Sociology (36:4), 2002, 985-1002.
[51] Weizenbaum, J. Computer Power and Human Reason, W. H.
Freeman, San Francisco, 1976.
[38] Spender, D. The Position of Women in Information
Technology - or Who Got There First and With What
Consequences, Current Sociology (45:2), 1997, 135-147.
[52] Wilson, B.C. A Study of Factors Promoting Success in
Computer Science Including Gender Differences, Computer
Science Education (12:1-2), 2002, 141-164.
[39] Suchman, L., and Jordan, B. Computerization and Women's
Knowledge, in Women, Work, and Computerization:
Forming New Alliances, K. Tijdens, M. Jennings, I. Wagner,
and M. Weggelaar (eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1989, 153160.
[53] Woodfield, R. Women, Work and Computing, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000.
[40] Trauth, E. M. Odd Girl Out: An Individual Differences
Perspective on Women in the IT Profession, Information
Technology & People (15:2), 2002, 98-119.
[55] Working Women The 100 Best Companies for Working
Mothers List 2002, 2002. URL:
http://www.workingmother.com/list.shtml.
[41] Trombley, M, Wall St. IT Women Trail Men in Pay,
Computerworld, February 12, 2001.
[56] Wright, R. Women in Computer Work: Controlled Progress
in a Technical Occupation, in Women and Minorities in
American Professions, J. Tang, & E. Smith (eds.), State
University of New York Press, Albany, NY, 1996, 43-64.
[42] Turkle, S. Computational Reticence: Why Women Fear the
Intimate Machine, in Technology and Women’s Voices, C.
Kramarae (ed.), Routledge & Kegan Paul, New York, 1988.
[43] Turkle, Sherry. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the
Internet, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1995.
[44] U.S. Department of Labor Women’s Bureau.
Nontraditional Occupations for Women in 2002, 2003.
[54] Woodfield, R. Women and Information Systems
Development: Not Just a Pretty (Inter) Face? Information
Technology & People (15:2), 2002, 119-139.
[57] Yakura, E. EEO Law and Managing Diversity, in Human
Resources Strategies for Managing Diversity, E. Kossek &
S. Lobel (eds.), Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA,
1997, 25-50.