Fixing the Knowledge, One Conference at a Time

Here's my report back on the Gendered Innovations conference.

Around 200 people joined us in March for our second two-day conference on Gendered Innovations in Science and Engineering. We were delighted to see such a good mix of people in the audience, including students, faculty (from Stanford and elsewhere - including the University of Uppsala in Sweden!), staff, and our wider community.

The first day opened with remarks by Professor Londa Schiebinger, setting out the reason for our conference subtitle: “Fix the Knowledge.” In a short talk setting out some of the background on the participation of women in science, she explained that the Clayman Institute was seeking to move the discussion beyond “fixing the women” (i.e. making women feel that they have a place in science) and “fixing the institutions” (i.e. creating structural and cultural change in universities and laboratories to make the working environment of science more welcoming to women). The Institute’s goal is to promote research that looks at the substance of science and engineering, “the knowledge”, to see how gender analysis can lead to new questions and completely new approaches to old problems. To publicize some concrete examples, Schiebinger proudly waved a copy of our new volume, also called Gendered Innovations in Science and Engineering (Stanford University Press, 2008), which was published on March 12 (available from good booksellers everywhere).

Professor Terry Winograd opened the first panel of the conference, on Women in Video-Gaming and Virtual Worlds, by asking whether the audience remembered when “gender in gaming” meant adding pink to the packaging? It was clear from this panel’s presentations that things have moved on!

Sheri Ray (Executive Director, Women in Gaming International) questioned the assumptions that are made about women as gamers and argued that women are as likely to enjoy “shoot ‘em up” games as men. She did not think women needed to have special games created just for them, arguing instead that the key is for games to provide a tutorial. Games which expect the user to explore them in order to understand them are, she argued, typically a turn-off for women - while that very feature is what makes them so appealing to most men. Nick Yee (Palo Alto Research Center) supported Ray’s conclusions, noting that he had found an 86% overlap between the interests of male and female players in online gaming. His research suggests that age is more important than gender in causing differing levels of interest/participation in online games. Only 25% of online gamers are teenagers: the average age of gamers is 26. Yee thought the gaming industry was doing itself no favors in neglecting the female and mature market. Professor Vladlen Koltun rounded up the panel with some remarks on the potential of virtual worlds for different kinds of interaction and the redrawing of gender identities. A lively discussion followed!

After the lunch break, the conference moved on to Gender in Engineering. Michelle Zawadzki (Senior Director, Global Knee Development, Zimmer Inc) talked about the development of the Gender Knee, which at last took into account that “Women are not just small men.” Zimmer’s research identified 25 ways knee difference could have been reflected in a new product: in the end, they focused on three. Zawadzki passed a model of the Gender Knee round the audience to help their understanding of these differences. She also described Zimmer’s new work on hip replacement technology: they have identified significant differences between men and women, not reflected in existing artificial hips, which may account for the high levels of dislocation experienced by women who have had hip replacements.

Deborah Kilgore (University of Washington) brought the discussion around to engineering education, focusing on the work of the Academic Pathways Study. She asked the audience to complete a short questionnaire on the relative importance of different factors in designing a playground, then showed the results of the same exercise conducted with first and fourth year engineering undergraduates. Kilgore argued that the results showed first year female students had a “broad” design focus (including items such as handicap access and restroom availability), while the men had a “close” design focus (with emphasis on budget, availability of labor, and material costs). By year four, the results had largely converged.

After the break, the audience heard from Professor Cynthia Friend (Harvard University), Professor Sue V. Rosser (Georgia Institute of Technology), Professor Nancy Hopkins (MIT), and Jim Batterson (Women’s Health Initiative, Stanford) on a range of issues from women in leadership in science, to the impact of scientific patenting, and improving the way women access medical care. Friend observed that scientists need to make more effort to highlight the fun and excitement to be found in scientific research so that more women, and more men too, are encouraged to follow that path.

Day two opened with Sibongile Van Damme (South African National Parks) discussing the role of women in promoting indigenous knowledge in, about and for the environment in South Africa. Speaking from her wide experience working in conservation and in government, she shared two case studies: the Schools Water Action Project (which had involved drawing on the knowledge of village elder women to better understand the use of and attitudes towards water, a scarce resource); and Swazi Indigenous Products, a cosmetics company created through the influence of the Swazi Queen Mother to help poor rural women in Swaziland generate an income from the natural resources around them. (Visit http://www.swazisecrets.com to learn more.)

Professor Kavita Philip followed with an exploration of gender in the artisanal fishing industry in Kerala, India. She shared a video of labor activist Nalini Nayak talking about the impact of new technology, foreign investment, and export-fixated government policy on the industry. Philip made the point that the fishers in Kerala were not opposed to new technology, nor to globalization in itself - indeed, they had forged alliances with people in similar situations in other countries - but they had suffered through the consequences of good intentioned, but ill considered, interventions by development and government agencies. Women, in particular, had found their role in the fishing industry under pressure; and the reduced role of traditional knowledge in the fishing industry had led to some bad outcomes for the local eco-system.

The conference ended with a panel of leading businesswomen in Silicon Valley, moderated by Professor Myra Hart (Harvard Business School). Hart opened by describing the research of the Diana Project which examined the numbers of women in venture capital; and why it that industry had been so poor at attracting and retaining women. She gave a brief introduction to the Clayman Institute’s current study of women in entrepreneurship.

Joyce Chung (Garage Technology Ventures), Ann Winblad (Hummer Winblad) and Diane Greene (CEO, VMware) then discussed their personal and professional experiences in Silicon Valley’s business world. Chung observed that women start companies at a higher rate than men, but they don’t pursue venture capital for high growth in the same way as men. She also wondered if venture capitalists had an unconscious reluctance to fund women entrepreneurs because they were blinked by their tendency to follow existing patterns (“Is this guy the next Steve Jobs?”). Greene commented that she had found it difficult to win over venture capitalists: in discussions with them on potential investment, they would often admit that they would seek to replace her as CEO if they invested.

The panel offered tips for potential VCs and entrepreneurs:
• Work on your network and find a mentor who can introduce you and show you the ropes (Chung - though Winblad disagreed!)
• Be confident in yourself - approach friends and family for investment, don’t be apologetic like you’re asking a favor. Present your idea as an opportunity. (Chung - and Winblad agreed with that!)
• Remember that every deal is crucial. One bad deal, and it can all be over. So think strategically. (Winblad)
• Be a constant learner, understand your flaws and develop your skills. (Winblad)
• Find some work/life balance, whether you are male or female; or you won’t have the energy and motivation to get through the bad days (and there will be bad days). (Winblad)
• Be adaptable - things can change dramatically, and quickly, and as a leader you have to be able to keep everything together. (Greene)
• Have a long term strategy for growth, and build it around a strong founding team. (Greene)