1. Your job application probably has language that discourage women from applying [1].
2. Men tend to apply for jobs even though they don't meet all of the qualifications, whereas women tend not to [2].
So there's bias introduced before you even see the list of applicants, and given no other information, it would not be that surprising to find a randomly selected woman from that candidate pool would be more qualified than a randomly selected man.
While that may be true, out right discrimination by turning away qualified male applicants is not how to correct a bias in applicant hiring, it would be extremely hypocritical to suggest that is some how okay. Give people tools to find the best candidates and they will use them, the market for tech talent is extremely competitive.
why would you select any candidate at random, though ? When sifting through candidate pools, (i.e. stack of resumes), isn't it a given that we should only call the best-qualified candidates ?
1. Your job application probably has language that discourage women from applying [1].
2. Men tend to apply for jobs even though they don't meet all of the qualifications, whereas women tend not to [2].
So there's bias introduced before you even see the list of applicants, and given no other information, it would not be that surprising to find a randomly selected woman from that candidate pool would be more qualified than a randomly selected man.
[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/02/textio-unitive-bias...
[2] http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/05/the-conf...