Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Understanding the Career Mobility of Blind and Low Vision Software Professionals (2404.17036v1)

Published 25 Apr 2024 in cs.SE and cs.HC

Abstract: Context: Scholars in the software engineering (SE) research community have investigated career advancement in the software industry. Research topics have included how individual and external factors can impact career mobility of software professionals, and how gender affects career advancement. However, the community has yet to look at career mobility from the lens of accessibility. Specifically, there is a pressing need to illuminate the factors that hinder the career mobility of blind and low vision software professionals (BLVSPs). Objective: This study aims to understand aspects of the workplace that impact career mobility for BLVSPs. Methods: We interviewed 26 BLVSPs with different roles, years of experience, and industry sectors. Thematic analysis was used to identify common factors related to career mobility. Results: We found four factors that impacted the career mobility of BLVSPs: (1) technical challenges, (2) colleagues' perceptions of BLVSPs, (3) BLVSPs' own perceptions on managerial progression, and (4) BLVSPs' investment in accessibility at the workplace. Conclusion: We suggest implications for tool designers, organizations, and researchers towards fostering more accessible workplaces to support the career mobility of BLVSPs.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (67)
  1. [n. d.]. JAWS® – Freedom Scientific. https://www.freedomscientific.com/products/software/jaws/
  2. 1990. The Americans with Disabilities Act — ADA.gov. https://www.ada.gov/
  3. 2010. Equality Act 2010: Guidance - gov.uk. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance
  4. 2016. India Code: Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/2155?sam_handle=123456789/1362
  5. 2017. About NV Access. https://www.nvaccess.org/about-nv-access/
  6. 2023. Assistive Technology. https://www.who.int/health-topics/assistive-technology
  7. 2023. Disability Hiring | Global Diversity and Inclusion at Microsoft. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/diversity/inside-microsoft/cross-disability/disabilityhiring
  8. 2023. Diverse Perspectives: People with Disabilities Fulfilling Your Business Goals. http://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/publications/fact-sheets/diverse-perspectives-people-with-disabilities-fulfilling-your-business-goals
  9. 2023. Google Diversity Annual Report 2023. (2023). https://about.google/belonging/diversity-annual-report/2023/
  10. 2023. Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) — WAC. https://www.w3.org/WAI/
  11. ACM. [n. d.]. About ACM’s Commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Computing. https://www.acm.org/diversity-inclusion/about
  12. M K Ahuja. 2002. Women in the information technology profession: a literature review, synthesis and research agenda. European Journal of Information Systems 11, 1 (2002), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000417 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000417
  13. “If I’m supposed to be the facilitator, I should be the host”: Understanding the Accessibility of Videoconferencing for Blind and Low Vision Meeting Facilitators. In Proceedings of the 25th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 1–14.
  14. A qualitative investigation of career orientations of a sample of Iranian software engineers. Scientia Iranica 19, 3 (2012), 662–673.
  15. The Diversity Crisis in Software Development. IEEE Software 38, 2 (March 2021), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2020.3045817 Conference Name: IEEE Software.
  16. Khaled Albusays and Stephanie Ludi. 2016. Eliciting Programming Challenges Faced by Developers with Visual Impairments: Exploratory Study. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (Austin, Texas) (CHASE ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 82–85. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897586.2897616
  17. Interviews and Observation of Blind Software Developers at Work to Understand Code Navigation Challenges. In Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132525.3132550
  18. Accessibility Barriers, Conflicts, and Repairs: Understanding the Experience of Professionals with Disabilities in Hybrid Meetings. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581541
  19. Wage growth through job hopping in China. (2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2199787
  20. AudioHighlight: Code Skimming for Blind Programmers. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). 206–216. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME.2018.00030 ISSN: 2576-3148.
  21. A Comparison of Program Comprehension Strategies by Blind and Sighted Programmers. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 44, 8 (2018), 712–724. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2017.2729548
  22. The advancement and persistence of women in the information technology profession: An extension of Ahuja’s gendered theory of IT career stages. Information Systems Journal 28, 6 (2018), 1082–1124.
  23. The Effects of “Not Knowing What You Don’t Know” on Web Accessibility for Blind Web Users. In Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Baltimore, Maryland, USA) (ASSETS ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132525.3132533
  24. Media Spaces: Bringing People Together in a Video, Audio, and Computing Environment. Commun. ACM 36, 1 (jan 1993), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1145/151233.151235
  25. Stacy M. Branham and Shaun K. Kane. 2015. The Invisible Work of Accessibility: How Blind Employees Manage Accessibility in Mixed-Ability Workplaces. In Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility (ASSETS ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1145/2700648.2809864
  26. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706QP063OA
  27. Caroline Casey. 2020. Do Your D&I Efforts Include People with Disabilities? Harvard Business Review (March 2020). https://hbr.org/2020/03/do-your-di-efforts-include-people-with-disabilities Section: Disabilities.
  28. CDC. 2023. Disability Impacts All of Us Infographic | CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/infographic-disability-impacts-all.html
  29. Kathy Charmaz. 2006. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. sage.
  30. Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. The SAGE handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft 2 (2012), 347–365.
  31. John W. Creswell and Cheryl N. Poth. 2018. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design (4 ed.). SAGE Publications, Los Angeles.
  32. Building and Sustaining Ethnically, Racially, and Gender Diverse Software Engineering Teams: A Study at Google. (2023).
  33. ”It doesn’t win you friends”: Understanding Accessibility in Collaborative Writing for People with Vision Impairments. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (Nov. 2019), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359293
  34. Mentoring students and professionals with disabilities. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 40, 2 (2009), 201.
  35. Avelino Ferreira Gomes Filho and Rodrigo De Toledo. 2015. Visual Management and Blind Software Developers. In 2015 Agile Conference. IEEE, Washington, DC, 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/Agile.2015.14
  36. Closeness is Key over Long Distances: Effects of Interpersonal Closeness on Telepresence Experience. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, United Kingdom) (HRI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 499–507. https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374785
  37. Understanding the role of networking in organizations. Career Development International 19, 2 (2014), 146–161.
  38. Barney G. Glaser. 1965. The Constant Comparative Method of Qualitative Analysis. Social Problems 12, 4 (1965), 436–445. http://www.jstor.org/stable/798843
  39. The effectiveness of pair programming: A meta-analysis. Information and software technology 51, 7 (2009), 1110–1122.
  40. Code saturation versus meaning saturation: how many interviews are enough? Qualitative health research 27, 4 (2017), 591–608.
  41. Examining The Work Experience of Programmers with Visual Impairments. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). 707–711. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00077 ISSN: 2576-3148.
  42. IEEE. [n. d.]. Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion. https://www.ieee.org/about/diversity-index.html
  43. Collaboration Tools for Developers. IEEE Software 39, 2 (2022), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2021.3132137
  44. Karina Kohl Silveira and Rafael Prikladnicki. 2019. A Systematic Mapping Study of Diversity in Software Engineering: A Perspective from the Agile Methodologies. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 12th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE). 7–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/CHASE.2019.00010 ISSN: 2574-1837.
  45. Sean Mealin and Emerson Murphy-Hill. 2012. An exploratory study of blind software developers. In 2012 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC). 71–74. https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2012.6344485 ISSN: 1943-6106.
  46. Álvaro Menezes and Rafael Prikladnicki. 2018. Diversity in software engineering. In Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 45–48. https://doi.org/10.1145/3195836.3195857
  47. Susan Michie and Debra L Nelson. 2006. Barriers women face in information technology careers: Self-efficacy, passion and gender biases. Women in management review 21, 1 (2006), 10–27.
  48. Addressing Accessibility Barriers in Programming for People with Visual Impairments: A Literature Review. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing 15, 1 (March 2022), 7:1–7:26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3507469
  49. Do We Really Need Another Meeting? The Science of Workplace Meetings. Current Directions in Psychological Science 27, 6 (Dec. 2018), 484–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721418776307
  50. Bura Naresh and B Venkat Rathnam. 2015. Job hopping in software industry with reference to select software companies: A Study. International Journal of Recent Research Aspects 2, 1 (2015), 38–45.
  51. Understanding Accessibility and Collaboration in Programming for People with Visual Impairments. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (April 2021), 129:1–129:30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449203
  52. CodeWalk: Facilitating Shared Awareness in Mixed-Ability Collaborative Software Development. In Proceedings of the 24th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3517428.3544812
  53. CodeTalk: Improving Programming Environment Accessibility for Visually Impaired Developers. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174192
  54. Perceived diversity in software engineering: a systematic literature review. Empirical Software Engineering 26, 5 (July 2021), 102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-021-09992-2
  55. Accessibility of Command Line Interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 489, 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445544
  56. MeetingCoach: An Intelligent Dashboard for Supporting Effective & Inclusive Meetings. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445615
  57. Douglas Schuler and Aki Namioka. 1993. Participatory design: Principles and practices. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203744338
  58. Carolyn B. Seaman. 2008. Qualitative Methods. In Guide to Advanced Empirical Software Engineering, Forrest Shull, Janice Singer, and Dag I. K. Sjøberg (Eds.). Springer, London, 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-044-5_2
  59. Kristen Shinohara and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2011. In the Shadow of Misperception: Assistive Technology Use and Social Interactions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 705–714. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979044
  60. The Future Workplace: Characterizing the Spectrum of Hybrid Work Arrangements for Software Teams. IEEE Software 40, 2 (2023), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2022.3230289
  61. Stack Overflow. 2022. Stack Overflow Developer Survey 2022. https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2022/?utm_source=social-share&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dev-survey-2022
  62. ”It’s Just Everything Outside of the IDE that’s the Problem”: Information Seeking by Software Developers with Visual Impairments. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445090
  63. Viktoria Stray. 2018. Planned and unplanned meetings in large-scale projects. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Agile Software Development: Companion (XP ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3234152.3234178
  64. John Tang. 2021. Understanding the Telework Experience of People with Disabilities. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (April 2021), 30:1–30:27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449104
  65. Determinants of career path preferences among Canadian engineers. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 19, 1 (2002), 1–23.
  66. Yi Wang and David Redmiles. 2019. Implicit Gender Biases in Professional Software Development: An Empirical Study. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS). 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEIS.2019.00009
  67. Hans-Georg Wolff and Klaus Moser. 2009. Effects of networking on career success: a longitudinal study. Journal of applied psychology 94, 1 (2009), 196.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (5)
  1. Yoonha Cha (4 papers)
  2. Victoria Jackson (5 papers)
  3. Isabela Figueira (3 papers)
  4. Stacy M. Branham (4 papers)
  5. André van der Hoek (3 papers)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets