9 ms·

Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified (2014)

• draw_down 10y ago
  > You’ve probably heard the following statistic: Men apply for a job when they meet only 60% of the qualifications, but women apply only if they meet 100% of them. Ah, I had not. Landing a job I don't know how to do 2/5ths of sounds awful.
  • liopleurodon 10y ago
    depending on who's writing up the "qualifications" though, a lot of them are probably bullshit
    • cholantesh 10y ago
      "10+ years of experience writing production systems in Elm" was a nice gem I saw recently.
      • deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
    • Namrog84 10y ago
      I am a fan of 10 years experience required in X. When X has only been around for 4 years.
    • draw_down 10y ago
      Well, now you've got two problems.
  • khedoros1 10y ago
    If it's just a programming language thing, those are easy to ramp up on, within weeks or months. Every job that I've had so far has involved a lot of extra learning. Even in the cases that I already knew the development language, there's been a large preexisting codebase, essentially providing its own in-house-built framework. The next position that I'm waiting for a written job offer for: I don't know the language, haven't ever developed on the OS, and I'll be looking at 15 years of legacy code. It sounds like an exciting opportunity to expand my knowledge on someone else's time and do something I haven't done before. Granted, I never would've applied on my own; they contacted me through LinkedIn. But that kind of thing is how I expect I'll find all my work in the foreseeable future.
  • dbcurtis 10y ago
    > Landing a job I don't know how to do 2/5ths of sounds awful. Then don't be an engineer? Seriously, an engineer's job is to invent new things that no one has done before, and tell other people how to reliably build more of them. If you start a project with a 100% clear vision of how to get to the end, then you are already behind your competition. Not knowing how to do 40%, and not being intimidated by 95%, seems like about the right mix.
  • logfromblammo 10y ago
    I have held enough different jobs to know that for some types of job posting, the listed requirements have almost nothing to do with the actual job duties and everything to do with imposing an arbitrary cutoff on the number of applicants to screen for it. Job advertisement: Immediate requirement for an illusionist/escapist. Must have 15 years experience in inverted underwater lockpicking. Nice to have some experience in juggling chainsaws. Job reality: You do coin and card tricks at children's birthday parties. Even if the job does require something you don't know, it is very likely that--no matter what it is--you could spend a few hours on the Internet learning how to fake it well enough to fool anyone short of an actual expert until you get the real on-the-job experience.
• Namrog84 10y ago
  Anecdotal evidence. I used to feel more strongly of the 100% qualified and I know many other men who have as well. There was a point in college that I didn't apply for a scholarship because I didn't have the 3.0 GPA requirement at the time, I had like a 2.95 About 7 months later I found out that a student with a 2.2 GPA had received the scholarship because so few people had applied, they were able to give them to everyone who applied, regardless of qualifications. That was the moment I realized that not everything is written in stone and even if you don't stand a chance, you still should make an attempt at pursuing things. Indirectly, since then I have encouraged all my friends, both men and women to apply for jobs or things that they are interested in, regardless of qualifications. Sometimes interest/passion alone can help get you a job, or perhaps they will create a more junior position just for you; it is not unheard of to do such a thing. Since I learned the lesson, there has probably been at least 7 different times in my life, that a rule/qualification was bent or changed that benefited me, because I simply tried for it.
  • agmcleod 10y ago
    Yep, this is a good mentality to have. I applied to a job after graduating from college that asked for 2-5+ years of experience. I was able to cite some project experience from school and from a 4 month co-op. Was enough to get an interview, and I took it from there to get a job offer.
  • rarec 10y ago
    In many pursuits, from romantic to professional, let those in charge of choosing make the decision, don't decide for them. As the saying goes, fortune favors the bold.
    • AnimalMuppet 10y ago
      Even in the trivial. Whenever some cashier asks me if I have a coupon, I say, "No, but you can give me one if you want". It pays off enough to be worth the ten seconds it takes to say.
  • Mz 10y ago
    Since I learned the lesson, there has probably been at least 7 different times in my life, that a rule/qualification was bent or changed that benefited me, because I simply tried for it. If you are "the wrong kind of person," the rules are much less likely to bend for you. If you are the wrong skin color, wrong gender, wrong religion, whatever, going for it can get the rules thrown in your face while everyone accuses you of being an asshole who is trying to break the rules while, at the exact same time, they make exceptions for "the right kind of people." So, maybe consider that is what a lot of women are complaining about when they decry male privilege.
• alistproducer2 10y ago
  I had to convince female I know to apply for a position she wasn't exactly qualified for. She did and got the job. Women are socialized to not be as aggressive here in the US, which is a shame because there are lots of bad people in jobs just because a better woman never thought to apply.
• Dirlewanger 10y ago
  Hate to sound like a strawman, but: why should this my problem? Unfortunately that's the nature of the game. Many software roles are like that. You just have to apply anyway. Other hidden biases women face, OK, got it, but this is a problem that occurs before any dialogue takes place. Now whether or not that advice gets properly dispensed is another issue.
  • rebelwebmaster 10y ago
    If you want to hire the best person for the job, why wouldn't you want to do what you can to avoid discouraging good candidates from even applying in the first place?
    • rarec 10y ago
      If they are so timid as to not even rise to the challenge of applying for a job with some uncertainty, how can you expect them to deal with uncertainty in the field?
      • beowulf_cluster 10y ago
        Because that's a nonsensical strawman; those things aren't even related. Personally, I see any employer advertising for a position with stricter requirements than what they'll hire as advertising their own dishonesty. It just makes them look bad.
        • rarec 10y ago
          It's mildly dishonest, but it does help you as the employer get closer to the ideal fit for the position. Especially one that is likely posted to a public forum. The fact that candidates that pre-select themselves out of being chosen is not really a big concern. Why should it be? The way around this is knowing exactly who it is you want for the job, but in that case I wouldn't be posting the job in a public forum. It's kind of what recruiters are intended for.
      • watwut 10y ago
• liquidise 10y ago
  Chief among these requirements is likely the "years of experience" line. I categorically ignore it in every job post i read. Every job post i write leaves it consciously absent. A candidate's ability should be judged strictly on what are their abilities today and what is their perceived ceiling. While you can argue that years of experience correlates to those details, it certainly does not inform them. Anecdotally, my most recent developer job post had an exactly 50:50 male to female applicant ratio. Without exception the women applying were juniors. If this article is to be believed, my putting even "1+ years of experience" might have arbitrarily rejected some number of otherwise qualified candidates.
• ng12 10y ago
  Here's a question: what if I don't want to hire people like that? If you know something about underwater basket weaving I absolutely expect you speak up when we're considering switching to twine from seagrass. I don't want you to keep quiet and let us make a bad decision because you're concerned your knowledge is invalid.
  • draw_down 10y ago
    Guess you better make sure the people you hire can do what they claim to be able to do.
    • tezzer 10y ago
      Or at least what you need them to do.
  • watwut 10y ago
    Tech interview would be an answer. Quiz applicants whether they know what they claim to know. Slashdot crowd will complain and maybe write a medium article, but so what.
  • Fraztastic 10y ago
    Then you're selecting for people who are overconfident blowhards, who don't really know as much as they think they do.
    • str33t_punk 10y ago
      but what ng is saying is that if someone is lacks too much confidence they are not useful. His example shows this --- the under confidant but knowledgable person does not contribute their knowledge when needed so they are not useful despite their knowledge.
      • themashedmind 10y ago
        Not useful? That's harsh. Could it be argued that not enough care is being taken by the team to solicit the thoughts of the less shouty members? If an organisation didn't want to hire or deal with said folk, perhaps it's a good thing for those looked over? Research seems to suggest that a more diverse workforce (of all varieties) leads to more successful businesses. And my own personal experience leads me to believe that skilled folk come in some weird and wonderful packages. I know which path I would choose.
• J-dawg 10y ago
  As a man who struggles with low confidence and self-esteem, I hate the way women are given special attention over this stuff. I frequently don't apply for jobs I see that I could probably do, for all of the reasons listed in the article. A couple of times I have even pulled out after a successful first round interview due to anxiety about continuing. This is an example of how the "women in tech" movement alienates men who would otherwise be potential allies. Instead of focussing on women, why not leave gender out of it and focus on "low-confidence candidates" (or whatever you want to call this cohort of people). That way if it's true that women are more likely to be "low-confidence" then you'll end up helping more women anyway, but you'll do it without alienating men. Ignoring the root cause and jumping straight to helping women is exactly what what makes feminists look like man-haters. I'm sick of the stereotype that because I'm an oh-so-privileged white male I must have had a ridiculously easy life and be full of confidence.
  • decebalus1 10y ago
    > I'm an oh-so-privileged white male I must have had a ridiculously easy life Been waiting for that privilege to kick in yet... however, after reading all those articles about women in tech and realizing that a) I tend to not negotiate and avoid conflict b) terrified (for my family's wellfare) of confronting my boss when I feel I'm being unjustly compensated\treated, c) shitting my pants when the next round of layoffs is leaked and d) being an introvert makes me not speak up as much in meetings to 'establish dominance', maybe I'm a woman after all?
    • Fraztastic 10y ago
      Maybe put the slightest bit of effort into researching this. Look at yourself. You got the job, right? You don't want to admit this to yourself, but it was easier for you than a woman.
      • Oxitendwe 10y ago
        Do you have any idea how insulting and dismissive you sound? You know nothing about the circumstances of his hiring, how can you possibly say his real and concrete experience was easier than that of some hypothetical woman?
• Fraztastic 10y ago
  You realize there's actually a severe gender imbalance in tech and most high paying careers, right? You realize you are privileged, in so many ways, whether or not you want to recognize it, right?
  • Lord_Yoda 10y ago
    > You realize there's actually a severe gender imbalance in tech and most high paying careers Agree. >You realize you are privileged, in so many ways, whether or not you want to recognize it Have you met the person above to make that comment? Low confidence/self-esteem is not a gender specific problem.
  • decebalus1 10y ago
    > You realize you are privileged, in so many ways, whether or not you want to recognize it, right? How?
  • wmccullough 10y ago
    I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, but can you provide examples of how privileged men are? Specifically, can you provide examples of how the person you responded to is privileged without meeting them? Can you also please cite reputable sources? This is the other source of alienation. Enforcing guilt onto someone based on how they were born (e.g. Gender, race). The last time I checked, this is outright bigotry. How about this, instead of trying to say that everyone is guilty, highlight that everyone has potential to be guilty, and a few are utilizing this so called birthright of privilege to exploit minority groups. Men have been lining up to be allies, and groups are right alongside them telling them they are not good enough.
    • rorosaurus 10y ago
      If you associate privilege with guilt, I think that provides some valuable insight on your attitude regarding this topic. I think you can recognize being privileged without feeling responsible (or guilty) for its existence.
      • 10y ago
• Mz 10y ago
  This is the take away here: What held them back from applying was not a mistaken perception about themselves, but a mistaken perception about the hiring process. This is critical, because it suggests that if the HP finding speaks to a larger trend, women don’t need to try and find that elusive quality, “confidence,” they just need better information about how hiring processes really work. This fits exactly with my experience in terms of being female seems to have somehow denied me certain kinds of information, skills and experience that are critical to getting things done. If I can somehow access that info, then I start getting stuff done more on par with the guys. It has nothing to do with suggesting women lack confidence or are filled with anxiety. In fact, the article is basically rebutting that idea.
  • wrs 10y ago
    The "old boy network" isn't just literally about knowing the other "old boys" (though that's obviously important), it's about a shared understanding of how things actually work, as opposed to how the publicly-exposed information says things work. So just networking with people isn't enough--you need to know the unspoken reality of how to make further progress. (This from someone who has painfully learned not to take any rule or process literally in the real world. There's a reason I like computers.)
    • Mz 10y ago
      I agree. But in a predominantly heterosexual world, simply being female makes it hard to access that info. Many of the men who have that knowledge only want to talk to me in order to determine if I will sleep with them. (So if they are faithfully married, they may just not want to talk to me.) That's a genuine barrier to gaining that knowledge. But I have found it helpful to focus on finding a way to get access to the information I need rather than just bellyaching about "sexism." Thank you for commenting.
      • wrs 10y ago
        My comment wasn't directed at you, but at people who seem to feel that simply exposing someone to the literal subject matter of an industry, whatever it might be ("Learn to code!" "Get an MBA!" etc.), is sufficient to bring them in. In reality the "in" crowd can't just do that, pat itself on the back for being so "inclusive" this week, and continue with business as usual. Overcoming unconscious cultural biases to actually bring people into the "success network" requires a lot more commitment than that. The good news is, some people are really trying. But there are still plenty of people who are too lazy, don't understand the problem, or don't care.
• ikeyany 10y ago
  This is why job descriptions shouldn't require a hard set of qualifications, but preferences (e.g. strong background in scripting, exposure to database systems, comfort using git, deep understanding of object-oriented development). Potentially strong employees don't want to get where they are by lying or stretching the truth.
• tezzer 10y ago
  I mean every single qualification I put on my job reqs. I also know from experience I'm not going to find that person. If I hire you, I'll pay you to learn the rest of the things.