Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Effective and scalable programs to facilitate labor market transitions for women in technology

Published 18 Nov 2022 in econ.GN and q-fin.EC | (2211.09968v3)

Abstract: We describe the design, implementation, and evaluation of a low-cost (approximately $15 per person) and scalable program, called Challenges, aimed at aiding women in Poland transition to technology-sector jobs. This program helps participants develop portfolios demonstrating job-relevant competencies. We conduct two independent evaluations, one of the Challenges program and the other of a traditional mentoring program -- Mentoring -- where experienced tech professionals work individually with mentees to support them in their job search. Exploiting the fact that both programs were oversubscribed, we randomized admissions and measured their impact on the probability of finding a job in the technology sector. We estimate that Mentoring increases the probability of finding a technology job within four months from 29% to 42% and Challenges from 20% to 29%, and the treatment effects do not attenuate over 12 months. Since both programs are capacity constrained in practice (only 28% of applicants can be accommodated), we evaluate the effectiveness of several alternative prioritization rules based on applicant characteristics. We find that a policy that selects applicants based on their predicted treatment effects increases the average treatment effect across the two programs to 22 percentage points. We further analyze how alternative prioritization rules compare to the selection that mentors used. We find that mentors selected applicants who were more likely to get a tech job even without participating in the program, and the treatment effect for applicants with similar characteristics to those selected by mentors is about half of the effect attainable when participants are prioritized optimally.

Authors (2)
Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (49)
  1. Early career outcomes of graduate employees: The effect of mentoring and ingratiation. Journal of management studies 33(1), 95–118.
  2. Ascarza, E. (2018). Retention futility: Targeting high-risk customers might be ineffective. Journal of Marketing Research 55(1), 80–98.
  3. Athey, S. and G. W. Imbens (2017). The econometrics of randomized experiments. In Handbook of Economic Field Experiments, Volume 1, pp.  73–140. Elsevier.
  4. Machine learning who to nudge: Causal vs predictive targeting in a field experiment on student financial aid renewal. Working Paper.
  5. Mentoring program experiment. AEA RCT Registry.
  6. Portfolio challenges. AEA RCT Registry.
  7. Generalized random forests. The Annals of Statistics 47(2), 1148–1178.
  8. Policy learning with observational data. Econometrica 89(1), 133–161.
  9. Barnow, B. S. (1987). The impact of CETA programs on earnings: A review of the literature. Journal of Human Resources, 157–193.
  10. The effectiveness of public-sponsored training revisited: The importance of data and methodological choices. Journal of Labor Economics 32(4), 837–897.
  11. Can mentoring help female assistant professors? Interim results from a randomized trial. American Economic Review 100(2), 348–52.
  12. The benefits and costs of JTPA Title II-A programs: Key findings from the National Job Training Partnership Act study. Journal of Human Resources, 549–576.
  13. What works? A meta analysis of recent active labor market program evaluations. Journal of the European Economic Association 16(3), 894–931.
  14. Open to MOOCs? Evidence of their impact on labour market outcomes. Computers & Education 173, 104289.
  15. Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and causal parameters. Technical report.
  16. The stereotypical computer scientist: Gendered media representations as a barrier to inclusion for women. Sex roles 69(1), 58–71.
  17. To succeed in tech, women need more visibility. Harvard Business Review, 2–6.
  18. Cox, D. R. (1972). Regression models and life-tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 34(2), 187–202.
  19. More women in tech? Evidence from a field experiment addressing social identity. Management Science 68(5), 3196–3218.
  20. Female peer mentors early in college increase women’s positive academic experiences and retention in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(23), 5964–5969.
  21. Why you should stop predicting customer churn and start using uplift models. Information Sciences 548, 497–515.
  22. European Commission (2021). Women in digital scoreboard 2021.
  23. Bridging the opportunity divide for low-income youth: Implementation and early impacts of the Year Up program. Pathways for Advancing Careers and Education. OPRE Report 2018-65. Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation.
  24. Show me the money! An empirical analysis of mentoring outcomes for women in academia. Higher Education Research & Development 26(4), 425–442.
  25. IT job market in Poland in 2021. Salaries, technologies and requirements in job ads.
  26. Can mentoring help female assistant professors in economics? An evaluation by randomized trial. In AEA Papers and Proceedings, Volume 110, pp.  205–09.
  27. GUS (2022a). Spoleczenstwo informacyjne w polse w 2022 roku. Glowny Urzad Statystyczny.
  28. GUS (2022b). Structure of wages and salaries by occupations in October 2020.
  29. Can MOOC programs improve student employment prospects? Available at SSRN 3260695.
  30. Targeting impact versus deprivation. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research.
  31. The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs. In Handbook of Labor Economics, Volume 3, pp.  1865–2097. Elsevier.
  32. Heterogeneous treatment effects and optimal targeting policy evaluation. Available at SSRN 3111957.
  33. Machine-learning-based high-benefit approach versus conventional high-risk approach in blood pressure management. International Journal of Epidemiology, dyad037.
  34. Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. and T. A. Judge (2008). A quantitative review of mentoring research: Test of a model. Journal of Vocational Behavior 72(3), 269–283.
  35. Microeconometric evaluation of the active labour market policy in Switzerland. Available at SSRN 233906.
  36. Lee, S. and M. Weidner. Atbounds: An r vignette.
  37. Bounding treatment effects by pooling limited information across observations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.05243.
  38. Murciano-Goroff, R. (2022). Missing women in tech: The labor market for highly skilled software engineers. Management Science 68(5), 3262–3281.
  39. Pallais, A. (2014). Inefficient hiring in entry-level labor markets. American Economic Review 104(11), 3565–3599.
  40. Pallais, A. and E. G. Sands (2016). Why the referential treatment? evidence from field experiments on referrals. Journal of Political Economy 124(6), 1793–1828.
  41. Ragins, B. R. and J. L. Cotton (1999). Mentor functions and outcomes: a comparison of men and women in formal and informal mentoring relationships. Journal of applied psychology 84(4), 529.
  42. Can mentoring alleviate family disadvantage in adolscence? A field experiment to improve labor-market prospects.
  43. Estimation of regression coefficients when some regressors are not always observed. Journal of the American Statistical Association 89(427), 846–866.
  44. Sianesi, B. (2008). Differential effects of active labour market programs for the unemployed. Labour Economics 15(3), 370–399.
  45. Spence, M. (1978). Job market signaling. In Uncertainty in Economics, pp.  281–306. Elsevier.
  46. Estimating the labor market signaling value of the GED. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 115(2), 431–468.
  47. United Nations (2021). Measuring digital development. facts and figures.
  48. Who’s benefiting from MOOCs, and why. Harvard Business Review 25(1), 2–8.
  49. Offline multi-action policy learning: Generalization and optimization. Operations Research 71(1), 148–183.
Citations (2)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 5 tweets with 12 likes about this paper.