Cognitive Factors Influence the Gender Gap in High Tech Entrepreneurship

The New York Times recently published another article on the lack of female as compared to male entrepreneurs, particularly in science and technology.  Author Claire Cain Miller noted, “Women own 40 percent of the private businesses in the United States, according to the Center for Women’s Business Research. But they create only 8 percent of the venture-backed tech start-ups, according to Astia, a nonprofit group that advises female entrepreneurs.”
The article discusses the usual suspects that lead to women’s lack of success in the working tech world.  For example, it points out that young women are not encouraged to move forward in math and science studies to the extent that their male counterparts are promoted.  Women also tend to sacrifice more to obtain family goals, which are not compatible with the time and resources it takes to start a company. 
While those traditional factors play a role as obstacles in the path to entrepreneurship in science and technology, what I found most interesting were the much less tangible cognitive components.  These cognitive components focus on images, tendencies, and habits that are in the mind/brain, of which many we are completely unaware. 
For example, one barrier to entry for women in engineering is its stereotype practitioner.  Close your eyes and picture a “computer scientist.”  If you pictured anything like the article’s description, “[a] male, skinny, no social life, eats junk food, plays video games, likes science fiction,” then you share that image with a majority of people.  Now, imagine yourself a smart, perky, soccer-player sorority sister in college.  It may be difficult for you to think of pursuing a computer science major simply because you do not fit in with the type.  If you’ve had little exposure to the field or its practitioners, it likely never will occur to you. 
Similarly, the lack of role models poses another cognitive obstacle for young would-be female entrepreneurs in science and technology.  We simply are not accustomed to the image of a woman playing an important role in a high-tech company.  When the imagery and the path leading to it are not pervasive, the thought that an individual could pursue the path may not even enter the equation.  Even if it does, the individual has few female options for advice and support, which may have a negative effect on the psyche.
Cognitively, women have a tendency to plan and to prepare, and a need to know everything before starting a task, instead of engaging in the risk of learning as we go.  Psychologists assert that this tendency is rooted in lack of confidence; I would add that women may also make decisions to avoid risk or loss more often than men.  As a result of this cognitive hang-up, women are more likely to wait until they are older to start a company.  In fact, I can attest that I’ve met many male entrepreneurs of all ages in the last few months, but only a handful of women, and all age 40-60.
Finally, the article suggests that people tend to be more trusting and comfortable with people of their own sex.  I think that this might be the most difficult obstacle to women getting ahead, anywhere, largely because the tendency is often unconscious.  So much of networking, hiring, funding and relationship-building occurs out of the office: on golf courses, racquet ball courts, sports bars, and on sailboats.  You are more likely to promote, hire, or fund the person next to you, particularly when that person is vetted by the person on the other side of you; particularly in science and technology entrepreneurial environments, that person is likely to be male.  This trust issue is particularly detrimental in funding situations because women have great difficulty in winning investors to get their businesses started; often they find the most help in women-focused capital groups.
The cognitive model states that you like and trust people who are most like you.  Obviously, there remain many similarities that occur between men and women, but differences in the methods men and women use to communicate, to negotiate, to multi-task, to come to decisions, to analyze, and to lead are likely to result in less-than-ideal business relationships.  Wouldn’t you much rather work with someone who thinks like you do so that you understand each other quickly and get the job done effectively and efficiently?  It just happens that the first people to occur to you for a job or for a funding opportunity are going to be those you work with best and have experience working with; investing in a new type of person takes a lot of work and some risk, so that option might not even break the level of consciousness.
The cognitive problem, though the most insidious, can be combated.  It just takes rigor in thought rather than in action per se.  First, people must become more aware of the meaning of images they maintain in their heads, and their knee-jerk reactions to certain professions or professionals.  People must be prepared to step outside the box and be flexible in whom they place on their mentor pedestals.  People must consider even more alternatives when promoting, hiring, or funding, including alternatives beyond the people sitting within 100 feet of their desks or their bar stools.  When a professional judgment is made, take a moment to ask why that particular judgment won out over other alternatives, and whether it was reasonably supported.  Consider why you took the path you did. 
Men may become more willing to silence knee-jerk tendencies and react in ways that are more likely to give women a chance, while women may convince themselves to re-evaluate their images of science and technology careers, and increasingly pitch their ideas for support and funding both to men and to women.     
 
By Amy Tindell. Amy is a fellow at MassChallenge with a B.A. in Cognitive Science from Dartmouth College. A PhD in Neuroscience and a J.D. in Intellectual Property from Boston College.