Women in Tech: Changing the Game, Not Just Playing It

Throughout my career, I’ve encountered many stereotypes about what women supposedly can’t do in engineering and technology. “Women aren’t analytical enough.” “Women can’t handle complex systems.” “Women just don’t think that way.”

They are just that – lazy stereotypes.

As we marked yet another Women in Tech Day on April 4, I found myself reflecting not on what women lack but on what we uniquely bring to tech.

I think the conversation needs to move beyond women breaking barriers in tech – we’ve heard that part. What’s more important now is how women are actively reshaping the narrative. 

Tech That Makes Sense

One of the most persistent misconceptions? That women aren’t as technical or as driven to innovate. That we don’t have the same zeal to build things. 

Honestly? That’s a narrow way to look at innovation.

The reality is, we’re not interested in building tech for tech’s sake. We’re building it to make sense. To solve real problems. To create solutions that actually work for people.

Instead of just asking, “Can we build it?” we ask, “Should we build it? Who benefits? Who’s left out?” It’s not about rejecting technology or avoiding complexity. It’s about making sure that innovation is meaningful, not just impressive.

We have seen this pattern confirmed in countless research papers and conferences. Women in science tend to ask different questions – they’re often the ones raising their hands to ask “But how does this affect actual people?” They’re more likely to push for including gender and social factors in studies that might otherwise ignore these variables. 

Even the United Nations emphasizes that women are key to climate action and building sustainable societies. You’ll often find that it’s women leading initiatives around social justice, environmental sustainability, and community resilience. This unique focus helps ensure that our work is not only technically sound but also socially responsible.

Collaboration: The Real Game Changer

Another stereotype we encounter too often is that women don’t belong in leadership because we’re too collaborative and consensus-driven. As if listening to people and building connections is somehow a flaw!

But collaboration is how innovation actually happens. Women just get that. We’re driven to bridge gaps. We’re not afraid to share credit or make space for other viewpoints.

In my experience, whether it’s working on geospatial standards when I was at OGC or teaming up on projects, women tend to listen first. We take in different perspectives. We’re focused on building solutions that work for everyone. It’s not about being “soft” – it’s about making things that last.

And we know the best ideas don’t come from just one person. They come from different people working together. That’s not just a theory. Studies show that organizations with higher gender diversity are more likely to outperform their competitors. 

Real leadership isn’t about being the loudest. It’s about actually hearing people out, bringing their ideas together, and finding common ground. Women are good at that because we don’t see leadership as a solo act. We’re not here to dominate. We’re here to build something real and lasting.

Leading with Empathy

Let’s also talk about empathy. Too often, it gets labeled as a soft skill, as if it doesn’t belong in the world of technology. But it’s not a liability – it’s an asset.

When women analyze data, for instance, we see the human stories behind it. We think about how technology impacts communities, how climate solutions affect everyday lives, and how we can create real change. It’s not about being emotional – it’s about being insightful. 

This isn’t just a personal observation. Research consistently shows that women score higher in leadership skills, including empathy and building relationships. 

This mindset is especially relevant in spatial sciences. We’re not just mapping landscapes or analyzing infrastructure. We’re looking at how human lives intersect with spaces. We’re connecting the dots between data points and real-world impacts.

Spatial Science Needs Emotional Intelligence

And since we are talking about all this, let’s also get one more thing straight: the idea that spatial thinking is somehow naturally “male” – that men can better read maps or women can’t park – is outdated science at best and gatekeeping at worst.

Yes, certain narrow tests of spatial ability – like mentally rotating 3D objects – show some gender differences. But real-world spatial intelligence is so much richer and more diverse than twisting a cube in your mind. And when researchers expand their definition of spatial thinking, those gender gaps mysteriously disappear.

Our biggest challenges – be it climate change, food security or rising social inequalities – aren’t just technical problems. They are very human problems with technical dimensions.

And because women lead with empathy and are better at collaborating, they also excel at seeing connections – we are bringing emotional intelligence into spaces that have traditionally valued only technical expertise.

For instance, when tackling disaster response mapping, the questions that drive truly impactful work go beyond just ‘Where did the flooding occur?’. The more pertinent questions are “How does this impact people?” and “What voices are missing from this data?” 

Just look at the whole field of feminist geography – it emerged precisely because traditional spatial analysis kept leaving out the human element that matters – how families use spaces differently, how communities form around physical places, how gender shapes our experience of landscapes.

Because women more often tend to see the people in the pixels. Because they understand that every map tells a story, and being deliberate about whose story we are telling, and recognizing that behind every data point is a person. And understanding that the most powerful insights come from seeing not just the technology, but its relationship to human lives and experiences. 

This isn’t some Mars/Venus nonsense about inherent differences. It’s about bringing diverse life experiences to the table. When you have navigated the world as a woman, you notice things others might miss. You develop different questions and different priorities. 

Building a Spatial Future 

The path forward isn’t just about getting more women into geospatial fields – it’s about transforming how spatial thinking itself is valued and understood across our industry. We need programs that recognize diverse manifestations of spatial intelligence. We need collaborative environments where connectivity thinking is valued along with traditional spatial analyses. We also need to highlight the critical role of bringing empathy and human understanding to spatial challenges.

The truth is the future of spatial science isn’t about who can mentally rotate a cube the fastest. It’s about who can bridge the gap between technical solutions and human needs; and who can see not just the points on the map but also the relationships between them.

Science desperately needs these perspectives. As our challenges get more complex, having people who can connect technical dots to human experiences isn’t just nice to have – it’s absolutely essential.

The future of our field – and our planet – depends on it.