Women and ICT Training: Inclusion or Segregation in the New Economy?

  • Hazel Gillard
  • Nathalie Mitev
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 208)

Abstract

With the digital revolution narrated as the means for social cohesion in the globally competitive national economy, policy and corporate moves are afoot to increase the inclusion of women into the ICT arena, particularly those who have traditionally remained on the fringes of societal inclusion such as lone women parents. By equipping them with ICT skills, such as network engineering, and utilizing their “soft” relational expertise, greater employ ability and opportunity is seen as the route toward inclusion. Yet a tension emerges between policy and practice, where such women are finding it hard to gain work, for the ICT industry, renown for its long hours culture, is slow to implement government recommendations for greater work flexibility and their soft skills remain unrecognized. This paper positions this tension within a wider labor market background that focuses on part-time work, for a general lack of full-time flexibility means women with care responsibilities have a limited range of employment choice. Part-time employment is frequently reflective of dead-end jobs and a catalog of inequalities, where occupational segregation and discrimination point to the feminization of low-level ICT skills. This gendered relation to the labor market is hidden by the narrative of inclusion through ICT skills acquisition. Furthermore, the relational association reduces women and men to normative gendered identities and roles which will do little to challenge existing stereotypes of technical expertise. The paper concludes that rather than inclusion, the possible result is further gendered inequalities and exclusion.

References

  1. Adam, A. “What Should We Do with Cyberfeminism?,” in R. Lander and A. Adam (eds.), Women in Computing, Exeter, UK: Intellect Books, 1997, pp. 17–27.Google Scholar
  2. Bauman, Z. Liquid Modernity, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, U., and Beck-Gernsheim, E. The Normal Chaos of Love, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  4. Belt, V., Richardson, R., and Webster, J. “Women’s Work in the Information Economy,” Information, Communication & Society (3:3), 2000, pp. 366–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowker, G., and Star, S. L. Sorting Things Out, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. Bulman, J. “Patterns of Pay: Results of the 2002 New Earnings Survey,” Labor Market Trends (110:12), 2002, pp. 634–655.Google Scholar
  7. Castells, M. The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business and Society, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. Castells, M. The Rise of the Network Society, Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers, 1996.Google Scholar
  9. CEC. “Building an Inclusive Europe,” Communication from the European Commission, Brussels, 2000.Google Scholar
  10. Cockburn, C. Brothers: Male Dominance and Technological Change, London: Pluto Press, 1983.Google Scholar
  11. Cockburn, C. Machinery of Dominance: Women, Men and Technical Know-How, London: Pluto Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  12. Cousins, C., and Tang, N. “The United Kingdom” in C. Wallace (ed.), Households, Work and Flexibility: Critical Review of Literature, Vienna: HWF Series of Project Research Reports, HWF Research Consortium, 2002.Google Scholar
  13. COM. “The eLearning Action Plan: Designing Tomorrow’s Education,” Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 2001.Google Scholar
  14. COM. “eEurope 2005: An Information Society for All,” Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 2002.Google Scholar
  15. Czarniawska, B. A Narrative Approach to Organization Studies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. Dahlbom, B. “The New Informatics,” Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems (8:2), 1996, pp. 29–47.Google Scholar
  17. de Beauvoir, S. The Second Sex, Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books, 1972.Google Scholar
  18. Dearing, R. “Review of Qualifications for 16–19 Year Olds,” The Robert Dearing Report, London: Skills Council Academic Authority, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. DfEE. “The Learning Age: A Renaissance of a New Britain,” Green Paper, Department for Employment and Education, Nottingham: DfEE Publications, February 1998.Google Scholar
  20. DfEE. “Skills for the Information Age,” The Stevens Report, Department for Employment and Education, Nottingham: DfEE Publications, 1999.Google Scholar
  21. DfES. “Skills for Life—The National Strategy for Improving Adult Literacy and Numeracy,” Department for Education and Skills (Department of Employment and Education), London, 2001.Google Scholar
  22. DfES. “21st Century Skills: Realising Our Potential,” Department for Education and Skills (Department of Employment and Education), London, 2003.Google Scholar
  23. DFID. “Social Exclusion in Pro-Poor Infrastructure Provision,” Department for International Development, London, 2002.Google Scholar
  24. DTI. “Excellence and Opportunity—A Science and Innovation Policy for the 21st Century,” Department for Trade and Industry, London, 2000.Google Scholar
  25. DTI. “Fairness for All: A New Commission for Equality and Human Rights,” White Paper, Department of Trade and Industry, in association with the Department for Constitutional Affairs, Department for Education and Skills, Department for Work and Pensions, and the Home Office, London, 2004 (available online at http://www.womenandequalityunit.gov.uk/).Google Scholar
  26. DTI. “Maximising Returns to Science, Engineering and Technology Careers,” A report for the Office of Science and Technology and the Department of Trade and Industry, prepared by People Science and Policy Ltd. and the Institute for Employment Research, University of Warwick, 2002.Google Scholar
  27. DTI. “Opportunity for All in a World of Change,” White Paper, Department for Trade and Industry, London, 2001.Google Scholar
  28. DTI. “Our Competitive Future: Building the Knowledge Driven Economy,” Department for Trade and Industry, London, 1998.Google Scholar
  29. DTI. “A Strategy for Women in Science, Engineering and Technology,” Department for Trade and Industry., London, 2003a (available online http://extra.shu.ac.uk/nrc/section_2/publications/reports/R1428_Strategy_for_Women_in_SET.pdf).Google Scholar
  30. DTI. “Women in IT Conference: Engaging & Retaining for Success,” Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of Education and Skills, London, January 22, 2003b.Google Scholar
  31. Durieux, D. “ICT and Social Inclusion in the Everyday Life of Less Abled People,” Key Deliverable, European Media and Technology in Everyday Life Network, 2003.Google Scholar
  32. Faulkner, W. “Strategies of Inclusion: Gender in the Information Society,” Symposium on Gender and Information and Communication Technologies: Strategies of Inclusion, Brussels, January 2004.Google Scholar
  33. Faulkner, W. “The Technology Question in Feminism: A View from Feminist Technology Studies,” Strategies of Inclusion: Gender and the Information Society, Brussels, 2000 (available online at http://www.rcss.ed.ac.uk/sigis/).Google Scholar
  34. Fryer, R. H. “Learning for the Twenty-First Century,” The Fryer Report, White Paper, First Report of the National Advisory Group for Continuing Education and Lifelong Learning, London, 1997.Google Scholar
  35. Greenfield, S., Peters, J., Lane, N., Rees, T., and Samuels, G. “SET Fair: A Report on Women in Science, Engineering and Technology,” The Greenfield Review, commissioned for the Department of Trade and Industry, London, November 2002.Google Scholar
  36. Hanseth, O., and Braa, K. “Globalisation and ‘Risk Society,’” in C. U. Ciborra and Associates (eds.), From Control to Drift: The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  37. Henwood, F. “From the Woman Question in Technology to the Technology Question in Feminism: Rethinking Gender Inequality in IT Education,” The European Journal of Women’s Studies (7), 2000, pp. 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hibbett, A., and Meager, N. “Key Indicators of Women’s Position in Britain,” Labor Market Trends (111:10), 2003, pp. 503–511.Google Scholar
  39. Kallinikos, J. “Recalcitrant Technology: Cross-Contextual Systems and Context-Embedded Action,” Working Paper 103, London School of Economics and Political Science, 2001.Google Scholar
  40. Kennedy, H. “Learning Works: Widening Participation in Further Education,” The Further Education Funding Council, London, 1997.Google Scholar
  41. Kodz, J., Harper, H., and Dench, S. “Work-Life Balance: Beyond the Rhetoric,” IES Report 384, Institute for Employment Studies, March 2002 (available through http://www.employment-studies.co.uk/pubs/)Google Scholar
  42. Lister, R. “Citizenship: Towards a Feminist Synthesis,” Feminist Review (57), 1997, pp. 28–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lu, A-X., and Wang, H. “The Problems and Prospects of Teaching in the Digital Age,” panel presentation to the Informing Science and Information Technology Education Joint Conference, Pori, Finland, June 24–27, 2003.Google Scholar
  44. Millar, J., and Jagger, N. “Women in ITEC Courses and Careers,” A report for the Department of Trade and Industry, Department for Education and Skills, and Women and Equality Unit, Suffolk, UK: DiES Publications, 2001.Google Scholar
  45. Moreau, M-P. “Work Organization and Working Conditions” in P. Vendramin, G. Valenduc, C. Guffins, J. Webster, I. Wagner, A. Birbaumer and M. Tolar (eds.), Conceptual Framework and State of the Art: Widening Women’s Work in Information and Communication Technology, Namur, Belgium: Foundation Travail-Université, 2003 (available online at http://www.ftu-namur.org/www-ict).Google Scholar
  46. National Statistics. “Labor Market Statistics,” Office for National Statistics, London., June 2004. (http://www.statistics.gov.uk).Google Scholar
  47. Norris, P. Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  48. Osborn, M., Rees, T., Bosch, M., Ebeling, H., Hermann, C., Hilden, J., McLaren, A., Palomba, R., Peltonen, L., Vela, C., Weis, D., Wold, A., Mason, J., and Wenneras, C. “Science Policies in the European Union: Promoting Excellence through Mainstreaming Gender Equality,” A report from the ETAN Network on Women and Science, Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2000.Google Scholar
  49. Panteli, N., Stack, J., Atkinson, M., and Ramsey, H. “The Status of Women in the UK IT Industry: An Empirical Study,” European Journal of Information Systems (8), 1999, pp. 170–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Panteli, N., Stack, J., and Ramsey, H. “Gendered Patterns in Computing Work in the Late 1990s,” New Technology, Work and Employment (16:1), 2001, pp. 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Payne, J. “All Things to All People: Changing Perceptions of’ Skill’ Among Britain’s Policy Makers Since the 1950s and Their Implications,” SKOPE Research Paper No. 1, Warwick University, 1999.Google Scholar
  52. Rees, T. “The Helsinki Group on Women and Science: National Policies on Women and Science in Europe,” Office for Official Publications for the European Communities:, Luxembourg, 2002.Google Scholar
  53. Rees, T. Women and the Labor Market London: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar
  54. Riessman, C. K. Narrative Analysis, London: Sage Publications, 1993.Google Scholar
  55. Roberts, G. “SET for Success: The Supply of People with Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematical Skills,” The Report of Sir Gareth Roberts’ Review, London, 2001.Google Scholar
  56. Robertson, M., Newell, S., Swan, J., Mathiassen, L., and Bjerknes, G. “The Issue of Gender Within Computing: Reflections from the UK and Scandinavia,” Information Systems Journal (11), 2001, pp. 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rochlin, S., and Boguslaw, J. “Business and Community Development: Aligning Corporate Performance with Community Economic Development to Achieve Win-Win Impacts,” The Center for Corporate Citizenship at Boston College, 2001.Google Scholar
  58. Rommes, E., and Faulkner, W. “Conclusion,” in E. Rommes, I. van Slooten, E. van Oost, and N. Oudshoorn (eds.), Designing Inclusion: The Development of ICT Products to Include Women in the Information Society, Strategies of Inclusion: Gender and the Information Society, 2003 (available online at http://www.sigis-ist.org/).Google Scholar
  59. Rubery, J., Smith, M., and Fagan, C. Women’s Employment in Europe: Trends and Prospects, London: Routledge, 1999.Google Scholar
  60. Rübsamen-Waigmann, H., Sohlberg, R., Rees, T., Berry, O., Bismuth, P., D’Antona, R., De Brabander, E., Haemers, G., Holmes, J., Jepson, M. K., Leclaire, J., Mann, E., Neumann, J., Needham, R., Christian, N., Vela, C., and Winslow, D. “Women in Industrial Research: A Wake Up Call for European Industry,” A report for the European Commission from the High Level Expert Group on Women in Industrial Research for Strategic Analysis of Specific Science and Technology Policy Issues (STRATA), European Commission Directorate-General for Research, Luxembourg, 2002.Google Scholar
  61. SEU. “Preventing Social Exclusion,” A report by the Social Exclusion Unit, London, 2004 (available online at http://www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk/).Google Scholar
  62. Strover, S. “Remapping the Digital Divide,” The Information Society (19), 2003, pp. 275–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Trauth, E. “Odd Girl Out: An Individual Difference Perspective on Women in the IT Profession,” Information Technology and People (15:2), 2002, pp. 98–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Valenduc, G. “Mapping ICT Profession” in P. Vendramin, G. Valenduc, C. Guffins, J. Webster, I. Wagner, A. Birbaumer, and M. Tolar (eds.), Widening Women’s Work in Information and Communication Technology: Conceptual Framework and State of the Art, Namur, Belgium: Foundation Travail-Université, 2003 (avaialble online at http://www.ftu-namur.org/www-ict).Google Scholar
  65. Vendramin, P. “Describing the Various Dimensions of the Gender Gap in ICT Professions” in P. Vendramin, G. Valenduc, C. Guffms, J. Webster, I. Wagner, A. Birbaumer, and M. Tolar (eds.), Widening Women’s Work in Information and Communication Technology: Conceptual Framework and State of the Art, Namur, Belgium: Foundation Travail-Université, 2003 (avaialble online at http://www.ftu-namur.org/www-ict).Google Scholar
  66. Wajcman, J. Feminism Confronts Technology, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  67. Walby, S. Gender Transformations, London: Routledge, 1990.Google Scholar
  68. Walby, S. Theorizing Patriarchy, Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers, 1990.Google Scholar
  69. Walby, S., and Olsen, W. “The Impact of Women’s Position in the Labor Market on Pay and Implications for UK Productivity,” Report to Women & Equality Unit, London: DTI Publications, November 2002.Google Scholar
  70. Wallace, C. “Overview” in C. Wallace (ed.), Households, Work and Flexibility: Critical Review of Literature, Vienna: HWF Series of Project Research Reports, HWF Research Consortium, 2002.Google Scholar
  71. Webster, J. “Gender Issues in European Socio-Economic Research on the Information Society,” in P. Vendramin, G. Valenduc, C. Guffins, J. Webster, I. Wagner, A. Birbaumer, and M. Tolar (eds.), Widening Women’s Work in Information and Communication Technology: Conceptual Framework and State of the Art, Namur, Belgium: Foundation Travail-Université, 2003a (avaialble online at http://www.ftu-namur.org/www-ict).Google Scholar
  72. Webster, J. “Working in the New Economy—The View from the Employee,” UK Work Organization Network, London, 2003b.Google Scholar
  73. Webster, J., and Valenduc, G. “Mapping Gender Gaps in Employment and Occupations” in P. Vendramin, G. Valenduc, C. Guffins, J. Webster, I. Wagner, A. Birbaumer, and M. Tolar (eds.), Widening Women’s Work in Information and Communication Technology: Conceptual Framework and State of the Art, Namur, Belgium: Foundation Travail-Université, 2003 (avaialble online at http://www.ftu-namur.org/www-ict).Google Scholar
  74. Wilson, M., and Greenhill, A. “Gender and Teleworking Identities: Reconstructing the Research Agenda,” in Proceedings of the 12 th European Conference on Information Systems, Turku, Finland, June 2004.Google Scholar
  75. Wilson, M., and Howcroft, D. “The Role of Gender in User Resistance and Informatin Systems Failure,” in R. Baskerville, J. Stage, and J. I. DeGross (eds.), Organizational and Social Perspectives on Information Technology, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000, pp. 453–471.Google Scholar
  76. Work and Parents Taskforce. “About Time: Flexible Working,” London, 2001 (available online at http://www.workandparentstaskforce.gov.uk).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hazel Gillard
    • 1
  • Nathalie Mitev
    • 1
  1. 1.London School of EconomicsLondonUK

Personalised recommendations