80% of women working in tech are looking for the exit
That’s a feature of the workplace, not a bug
The 2025 Lovelace Report sets out the cost to enterprise tech employers and to the wider digital economy of the broken pipeline of female tech talent. Here we dig into the analysis, with exclusive comment from the report’s authors.
The 2025 Lovelace Report tells us that the cost of 40,000 to 60,000 women either switching tech jobs or deserting the sector altogether is estimated at £2 billion to £3.5 billion annually. The report quotes amongst multiple data sources, ONS data showing that the number of men employed in the ICT sector has increased by 11.5% over the past five years, whereas the number of women employed has fallen by 7% over the same period.
Despite all the diversity campaigns, all the promises “to do better” by tech employers, all the snarky asides about ‘diversity hires’, tech remains as male a domain as it has been since the 1960’s. This was the era in which salaries for coding rose significantly - at which point lots of men decided that they wanted in to a career which had been considered low skill and thus dominated by women since Bletchley Park was in its heyday.
Decades of stereotyping later, much energy has gone into widening the pipeline of entry level of female tech talent by inspiring girls and young women to imagine and pursue careers in tech. This work is welcome and highly valuable, but the 2025 Lovelace Report lays bare a difficult truth: those women are unlikely to stay for the long haul.
Almost 80% of the 500+ women surveyed for the Lovelace research had either recently left or intended to leave their roles. This is not a bug in the tech workplace. It’s a feature.
It’s not all about childcare
Why is the rate of female attrition from tech so much higher than that of men?
Caregiving responsibilities are frequently cited, with women apparently far keener on pursuing the dream work/life balance than their male colleagues. There is also a great deal of focus on providing female role models for aspiring tech women.
However, the Lovelace research found that caregiving responsibilities were cited as a primary driver for exit by only 3% of women. 55% didn’t have children. Only 8% cited a lack of role models.
So, what are the problems pushing women out of tech? The single most cited reason (by 25%) was ‘limited direction and opportunity in career progression’. This was closely followed by ‘lack of recognition’ (17%) and ‘inadequate pay’ (15%).
The report also found evidence of a clear attrition window. Women are most likely to exit after 6 – 15 years in the industry. For those who have spent between 3 and 10 years in the industry, 65% are looking elsewhere. This mid-career stage, where men are transitioning into more senior roles, is the point where women are leaving.
Women wait longer for promotions than men (3-4 years as opposed to the industry average of 2 years.) Almost 40% of women with over 20 years’ experience in tech report waiting more than 5 years to progress into senior leadership. 60% of women respondents with between 6 and 20 years of experience were earning less than the £100,000 industry benchmark.
Leaning in
It’s been more than a decade since Sheryl Sandberg elevated her personal brand by telling other women to ‘Lean in’ to leadership opportunities. Sandberg’s argument was that women weren’t progressing because they were insufficiently committed. They were too shy to take their seat at the table and just didn’t want it enough. To be clear, women were – are – blamed for their own under representation in leadership.
By contrast, the Lovelace Report details the extent to which mid-career women are leaning in. Women are investing their time and money into their career development. Their employers? Less so.
Nearly 70% of those surveyed were taking on extra training and qualification outside of their everyday work. Despite this, experienced women are often still perceived as not ‘leadership ready’.
When asked what they perceived as the key barriers to their advancement, 29% of women cited the male domination of the industry, 28% cited the lack of established path to the C-suite and 24% cultural and promotion bias. 23% cited ‘no opportunity for me to take on leadership roles.’
Changing the shape of the workforce
If tech employers are genuinely committed to preventing female talent from walking, what should they do?
What distinguishes the Lovelace Report from so much of what has gone before, is what its authors don’t recommend. There are no calls for quotas, women only slates, inclusion workshops, allyship training or any measure reminiscent of the ‘Diversity & Inclusion’ theatre which failed to rebalance the tech workforce between 2020 and 2024.
The authors argue that employers need to start with more strategic workforce planning and focus more on skills. Speaking exclusively to Computing before the launch event last week, Karen Blake, Digital Inclusion and Policy Specialist and former co-CEO of Tech Talent Charter answered a question on “The Great Flattening” – the removal of layers of enterprise tech middle management.
“If we had a better grasp on what the skills landscape looked like in our organisations, we wouldn't see people underperforming in those [middle management] roles. I think the conversation about flattening supports the scaffolding of what we’re trying to do here which is to say to organisations ‘look at skills’ when you are looking at matching roles, needs and people.”
Deborah O’Neill, Head of Performance Transformation and Partner at Oliver Wyman elaborated on this changing organisational structure.
“Lots of the organisations I’m working with on operating model and organisational structure are looking at how to reward people for being strong deliverers, rather than it being about layers, and how many people you manage. Historically, you'd move up because you were then going to manage 50 people for example. Now they want those experts to remain experts, but be the senior expert guiding the troops, rather than it being just about line management.
“I think that plays to the expertise model of women, because women are very good at collecting skills and it's about showcasing those in a world where worth isn’t defined by how many people you’re managing.”
Dr Vanessa Valley OBE, Founder of WeAreTechWomen perceives organisational flattening as an opportunity for change, given the extent to which the traditional ‘pyramid’ organisational structure has failed women in tech.
“Leadership may not necessarily be the C suite or director titles that we're all used to seeing within our organisations. I think as those as we see the flattening of those structures there’s more opportunity to change what leadership looks like.”
Valley also alluded to another issue that the research draws attention to – inequality of access to sponsors and high-profile work.
“As we see this shift of hierarchy, the playing field flattens a little bit in terms of who you have access to as well. It's no longer that person that sits in that office that you never get to see. So that is an opportunity.”
The Lovelace Report sets out a three-step plan that companies can implement now to retain and nurture the women within their ranks. Further details can be found here. It isn’t necessarily expensive, and most organisations could do it with data they already have. In summary employers should:
- Actively monitor women who have been with the business for several years for career stagnation and intervene with genuine opportunities
- Ensure that high-visibility, big ticket work and sponsorship is allocated on the basis of skills as opposed to affinity or proximity. Skills should be regularly audited and sponsors and those being sponsored should be regularly surveyed to see how it’s working for everyone.
- Career progression should be defined and transparent with zero ambiguity on requirements for progression at each step and equal pay. As the authors of the Lovelace Report pointed out at the launch event, implementing these measures would help tech employers to get the best out all their employees, not just women.
The alternative is to continue as we are, with traditional pyramid shaped organisational structures that benefit from the experience of the women but only for as long as they can tolerate a system that was designed without their involvement.
That’s a business issue, and it is costing all of us.