I think women being great at what they do is the single best advert for that fact that women are great at what they do.

When I read this article, and the column to which it relates I was reminded of an incident just the other week.

I was in a training session, and the trainer was telling us about what he had lined up for the next week. He was going to be helping out a student with her programming assignment. She'd been on a training event with him, and had found him approachable and so had arranged to pay him for 1 to 1 tuition to help her get through her final assignments. All of this is fine and reasonable.

He said, that in all honesty, she wasn't cut out to be a developer, and was probably actually more interested in Project Management. Fair enough, I assume there are better, more appropriate courses that could have been studied, but we don't always know what opportunities are available until we stumble across them.

He then said she wasn't really very good at the development stuff, and her previous assignment ended up being a combination of her work, his work, and her father's work. Again, fair enough. Not every woman has the determination to be a developer (I'm too close to development to judge whether it's an in-built quality or a learned skill or a combination of the both).

He then said, and this is where I lost it a bit, according to his wife she was a real "girly girl". This annoyed me, and he realised it. He later asked me what he should have said instead. And I didn't have a ready answer. So this blog post is me redressing that. What I should have said is:

If she was a male, what would you have said? Would you have said he's a real "blokey bloke"? Would that have been your reason for him not to be a good developer? Would you have specified what he was like at all? Would it have seemed relevant?

and

Why did you say your wife said that? Is it because if you say that it isn't you making the judgement? It's another woman, and that is ok and acceptable? You didn't mention your wife through the rest of the training event, so why is her judgement here of relevance?

and also

What does it matter whether a female developer chooses to dress in jeans, hoodie and trainers or Laura Ashley dresses and high-heeled shoes? Does the clothing we wear effect our ability to deliver high quality, robust and scalable solutions? If it does, why don't all development departments have the same dress code across both sexes?

How I wish I could have managed to get any one of these responses out, and heard the replies, and understood whether I'd just misunderstood his meaning, or whether he just didn't understand what he was saying and the effect it could have on someone starting out, someone without 18 years of experience working in a development environment. But it wasn't to be, and so I'm left with this, a blog post which leaves me none the wiser, but at least gives me a script to follow if there is ever a next time...

Duchess is a global network for women in Java technology. We provide a platform through which women can connect with each other and get involved in the greater Java community. We organize workshops aimed at giving everyone an opportunity to share and learn good ideas in new Java and related technology.

We welcome all women who are interested in Java technology, including developers, architects, testers, business analysts, and others. We truly believe in cross-functional learning so as to create more effective and productive teams.

Currently, we have active networks in the Netherlands and France and are looking for more Duchess leaders everywhere. Join us and help make Duchess into something great.

Richard sent me a snippet of an email about Duchess the other day as he knows that at the moment I'm going through a bit of a "Where are all the techy females hiding?" phase. Anyway, the original email said

I had met several members of the women in Java (aka Duchess) - Java User Group at the Devoxx conference and they asked me to pass on their details to all of the London based women in Java (and their supporters) on this list.

Their website (contains details of what they are about and how they support women in Java) is at http://www.jduchess.org/ and they are looking to branch out into the UK to expand the global network.

They were really friendly and approachable so drop them a line if you're interested in their organisation!

Java isn't my technology, but figured I'd advertise it here in case anyone stumbles across it

 

 

While I'm on vacation, here's a guest post by John Hersey. I'll bet the title at least got your attention.

Many, women and men, believe they can’t. Equally, many have experienced failure while trying, but there is indeed a way for women leaders to be successful and happy.

The question is: What makes women happy? A team of researchers spent five years looking for the answer to this question. After this time, they discovered why successful women are as much excellent professionals as excellent in life.

They talked to more than one hundred extraordinary women worldwide who have managed to uphold happy families and also leadership careers in every kind of field, from orchestra conducting to espionage, and who state that they are deeply satisfied with the choices they have made.

Based on their research, the team discovered 3 practices that these women follow that, when combined, become a winning formula, and are all aspects that we can control:

1. They have a passion
One of the most important characteristics the researchers found is that these women are prominent because they are doing something they see as significant.

Some women simply know what makes them happy and chase after it since they are very young, like a Nigerian lawyer who was inspired by a TV show when she was a child and didn’t stop until she was able to establish her own law firm. For others, the road towards the discovery of what makes them happy sets them free to find passion in new ways, like a consultant who dumped a profitable career her parents had chosen for her to follow her dream of making movies.

Finding their passion gave these women the strength to turn into individuals that make things happen, instead of waiting for others to decide about their lives. Being able to do this fills you with a kind of energy that moves from work to home and vice versa, making everything right, and rewarding.

2. They see obstacles as opportunities
These women are realistic, they are able to analyze the evidence and act accordingly. Women are very often labeled as emotional extremists, vulnerable to feelings of failure when confronted with problems, but it is possible to turn things around consciously and take care of any issue for what it is.

3. They bond with others
Being emotional is, in fact, a strength of successful women. Women leaders are able to bond with people, and through these deep relationships, they get a feeling of being in the right place. By acknowledging the individuals around them, they are able to boost and speed up their personal growth.

The research showed that women who follow these practices are happier and more successful in their jobs, as leaders, and in their lives.

Every company should be aiming to get and keep these women leaders; they are strongly capable of steering leadership performance and action by creating meaning and might, by outlining circumstances to find the best way out, by channeling the force of comprehensiveness and total commitment, and by dynamically directing energy flows.

These women are powerful and happy because they assumed control of their lives, and anyone can do the same, regardless of ambiguity, chance, or any stress they may be experiencing.

John Hersey
John Hersey is a successful business owner, published author and motivational leadership speaker. John writes one of the most recognized leadership blogs in the business world: http://www.JohnHersey.com/blog

 

 

 

I'm always a bit wary of articles and posts which are gender related, and especially when they're written by someone of the opposite one... However, this is quite interesting to read, especially if you substitute "people" for "women" at appropriate points.

For instance, "Every company should be aiming to get and keep these women leaders" is a great sentiment, but surely "Every company should be aiming to get and keep these great leaders" would be better? Or maybe even, "Every company should be aiming to identify, develop and keep these great leaders" - allowing for the home-grown talent to be spotted, and shaped (regardless of gender). After all, leadership, like many other skills, is something that should be ever evolving. Certainly on a personal level, my skills in the various elements that make up leadership, change (hopefully for the better) due to external or internal influences - it could be feedback received, it could be a book I've read, a podcast I've listened to, a practice I've seen someone else using to good effect, some training I've received or a blog post read.

None the less, I've just gone off and subscribed to John Hersey's blog as there looks to be some interesting and relevant material there.