I recently wrote an article posting some analysis of the (awful) gender disparity demonstrated by the number of women entering STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) degree courses, and particularly Computer Science (14% in 2015). I also noted a similarity between that number and the percentage of women being celebrated in the CIO 100 last year (13%). But, as one of my esteemed colleagues pointed out over a beer (yes, we really do discuss gender equality and stats over beer, especially if it involves Tableau), I had no right to infer any kind of correlation. Social scientists have the mantra of “Correlation does not equal causation” drilled into them at an early age, but I’d gone one better and just decided that two numbers looking similar might imply some correlation. For shame.
Clearly, it was wrong of me to to make any such inference, but my own shortcomings sparked a question that demanded answering – is there, in fact, any correlation between the big CIO chair and a STEM education, and more specifically, Computer Science degrees?
How to answer this question?
I realised that I already had a lot of the data at hand – the CIO100 that had helped inspire the gender discussion. Taking both the 2015 CIO 100 and Computing’s 2016 IT Leaders lists, I researched all the CIOs on both lists who had a LinkedIn profile with their Bachelor Degree listed*.
Of 175 CIOs and IT Leaders from both lists (there’s a small amount of duplication), 75 listed no degree on their LinkedIn profile. From this, we obviously can’t tell if they have no degree (which would be awesome and make a very different story**), or if they have just chosen not to link it from their profile. Either way, for the sake of this experiment, they’re now excused from our sample.
That, neatly, leaves 100 people that we have degree data for.
The next step was to try and normalize the data to make it easier to visualize. In an attempt to keep it relatively vanilla, I’ve eyeballed the degrees that are listed and made an attempt to roll them up into UCAS’ published ‘Subject Groups’, which also allows us to use the data in future with other UCAS datasets. This broadly required me to roll up degrees like ‘Economics and Law’ to my best approximation; in this case Social Sciences (L100 Economics). I might have made mistakes, but it’s good enough for me.
With all that done, roll on the stats…
Fact: A STEM degree is disproportionately common among CIOs and Technology Leaders
Is this really a surprise? Well, no not really, but now I’m not just intuiting my data. I feel better already.
Fact: 39% of the UK’s top technology leaders hold IT degrees
Of our sample of 100 technology leaders for whom we have degree information, 39% have degrees which roll up into the Computer Sciences group. Engineering – a broad field which includes civil, mechanical, electrical and marine engineering – is also very well represented. Of those, Mech Eng is probably the most popular contributor. The Computer Sciences group is made up of degrees including Information Systems, Computer Science and Business Information systems, as well as joint honours degrees.
Perhaps the fact that Computer Sciences dominates the degree qualifications of CIOs is self-evident, but what’s more impressive is how that long tail looks if we further categorise our data. What if, for instance, we consider STEM vs Non-STEM courses?
To do this, I’ve made a call on what I think constitutes a STEM subject group***. Let’s say that Computer Sciences and Engineering are in but Law and Social Studies are out.
78% of the UK’s top technology leaders hold STEM degrees
The news is in, it’s categorical and apparently obvious. The vast majority (over three-quarters) of the most succesful technology leaders in the UK (as judged by either Computing or CIO magazine) hold STEM degrees.
To be clear, I don’t in any way want to suggest that holding a STEM degree makes a CIO better or worse than one who doesn’t. I also don’t believe that holding a degree makes an inherently better CIO. I do, however believe that if the pool of CIOs is well stocked with STEM degree holders, we should make sure that STEM courses are filled with a diverse, interesting, chaotic and balanced mixture of students.
I acknowledge (and hope) that tomorrow’s technology leaders won’t look anything like those of today. Likewise, I believe that it would be no bad things for degrees to wane as an indicator of job suitability. However, I still feel that I can stand firmly behind my original assertion: we need to work very hard to encourage a more diverse and balanced pool of applicants to STEM degree courses in the UK. There are so very many reasons for this, but not least because they are critical to improving the UK’s position in the international digital economy.
Gotta love data.
* It’s not quite as stalky as it sounds – I know, or have met many of these folk at industry events.
* If you’d like to do something similar that proves how many CIO/CTOs have made the top spot without a degree, I’d love to hear the results.
** I’m a little surprised to be honest. I’ve always thought of myself as a social scientist, but according to the current UCAS course groups, apparently Psychology is a ‘Biological Science’. If I’m a very good boy, maybe one day I’ll grow up to be a vet and do a real job.