Why the tech industry needs courageous women who lead differently

As we approach International Women's Day 2026, the conversation about women in technology feels both familiar and unfinished.

Despite decades of progress, women remain underrepresented in technical leadership roles and continue to exit the sector at disproportionate rates mid-career. Globally, women make up roughly a third of tech roles, yet representation drops to just over 10% at senior leadership level. More than half leave the industry by mid-career, often citing limited advancement opportunities and cultural barriers.

The question is no longer whether we need more women in tech. The question is what kind of leadership the future of tech demands, and who is prepared to shape it.

Decades ago, I studied Computer Science at the University of Queensland. In a cohort of 600 students, just six of us were women. I began my career at Accenture in technology consulting before moving into leading large-scale change programs that bridged technology, people and performance.

Like many women in male-dominated environments, I learned early that I had to overprepare to be taken seriously. But over time, I realised the issue was not capability. It was culture. It was leadership norms built for a different era. Systems that weren't designed for diverse life stages, perspectives or career paths.

Decades later, the gap persists. 

If we want to retain women in tech, we can't simply expect them to succeed within the existing paradigm. We must redesign the paradigm itself.

Trailblazing women in tech have shown us what courageous leadership can achieve. In the 1960s, Dame Stephanie Shirley founded a software company that programmed Concorde's black box flight recorder. At a time when women were largely excluded from technical roles, she predominantly employed women with dependents and pioneered part-time and remote work arrangements decades before they became mainstream. Despite her business success, she signed business correspondence "Steve" rather than "Stephanie" to ensure her letters were taken seriously.

More recently, Reshma Saujani, founder of Girls Who Code, has mobilised thousands of young women into STEM with a simple but powerful message: teach girls bravery, not perfection.

Both leaders expanded who gets to participate in technology. Today, we must expand how leadership itself is defined.

The data makes clear that this is not merely a pipeline issue. Women represent around 35% of STEM graduates globally, yet in many G20 countries they account for only about 22% of the STEM workforce. Representation narrows further in senior roles. Thousands leave digital positions each year.

The common thread is not lack of talent. It's outdated systems.

Traditional management models that equate visibility with value. Rigid career pathways that penalise non-linear progression. Work practices that reward endurance over impact. Cultures that subtly signal that flexibility is an exception rather than an intelligent design choice.

If technology is meant to be future-focused, why are so many of our leadership models anchored in the past?

Organisations serious about retaining and advancing women in tech must move beyond incremental initiatives. The shift required is structural and cultural.

First, leadership must be anchored in clear purpose. Purpose is not a slogan or a mission statement. It is a shared understanding of why the organisation exists and the impact it seeks to create. When people can see how their work connects to a broader mission, engagement and commitment deepen. Yet only around one in three employees can clearly articulate their organisation's purpose. Women in tech are not seeking token inclusion; they are seeking meaningful contribution. Purpose creates that alignment.

Second, we must have the courage to challenge entrenched behaviours. Command-and-control management, inflexible career ladders and outdated performance models no longer serve complex, knowledge-driven environments. Women continue to carry a disproportionate share of caring responsibilities. When flexibility is treated as a concession rather than a strategic enabler, we send a clear message about whose needs matter most.

Finally, organisations must intentionally design for trust, autonomy and impact. Psychological safety that encourages experimentation. Clear expectations that focus on outcomes rather than hours. Leadership that creates coherence during rapid technological change, particularly as AI reshapes workflows and decision-making. These are not "soft" ideas. They are competitive advantages.

International Women's Day often centres on representation. But representation without redesign risks perpetuating the very systems that drive women away.

Progress will not come from waiting for permission. It will come from courageous women who challenge outdated assumptions, and from leaders of all genders who recognise that inclusive, purpose-led and change-ready leadership is not a diversity initiative - it is a strategic imperative.

The next era of technological innovation will not be built on code alone.

It will be built on cultures that enable diverse minds to contribute fully, sustainably and boldly.

And that is a future worth designing.