MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409014846 · doi:10.1109/emr.2025.3555508

Why Do Women Professionals Leave the IT Field? Ten Insights and Recommendations From the World IT Project

2025· article· en· W4409014846 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Engineering Management Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField (mathematics)Young professionalBusinessEngineeringManagementPublic relationsPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents 10 insights explicating the reasons why women information technology (IT) professionals leave the IT field. This study analyzes the data obtained from 10 386 IT employees in 37 countries, collected during the World IT Project, the largest academic IT study ever conducted. The findings indicate that at the highest risk of permanently leaving the IT profession are women who 1) are employed part-time, have less education, and, as a result, work in supporting and liaison roles rather than in traditional core (i.e., men-dominated) IT positions; 2) are between 21 and 29 years old; 3) belong to an organization in a non-IT industry that has not reached a high level of organizational IT maturity and employs fewer than 200 people; and 4) exhibit high uncertainty avoidance and low individualism. Women occupying middle- and senior-level managerial positions are also more likely to leave IT than their nonmanagerial counterparts. The insights reveal an archetype of a woman IT employee who is at the highest risk of permanently leaving the IT profession and lead to practical recommendations for IT managers and policymakers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it