In one of our recent articles, we talked about the problems with mentoring as a lone practice. Today, we want to be focusing on another European nation, analyzing its best practices: Italy.
The data from Italy is clear: it’s not only mentoring, but isolated “heroic” actions by individuals are not enough as well. To correct the imbalance, we need to treat gender inequality as a structural institutional issue rather than a “deficit” in women’s confidence or skills.
The Life Cycle of Inclusion: Italy’s Strategic Roadmap for Women in Tech
In the quest to close the gender gap in ICT, we often fall into the trap of thinking one-off workshops or a single inspirational speech will do the trick. However, the latest research into Italian best practices suggests that success lies in a triple-threat approach targeting three distinct phases of life: adolescence, higher education, and professional career.
1. Adolescent Girls: Sparking Interest Without the Pressure
For girls aged 7–17, the social environment—parents and teachers—is the ultimate influencer. Policy makers have little direct “street cred” here; the change happens at home and in the classroom.
The “Play” Factor: Tech shouldn’t feel like a high-stakes exam. Best practices show that early, non-competitive, and playful exposure to coding reduces the fear of failure before stereotypes can take root.
Relatable Mentors: Adolescents don’t necessarily need a Nobel Prize winner as a role model. They need someone “close in age” or background whose path feels attainable—a motivator who “walks alongside” them rather than an intimidating instructor.
2. Higher Education: Fighting the “Impostor” in the Room
Once in university, the challenge shifts from interest to retention. Even high-achieving women in STEM report high levels of “Impostor Syndrome” in male-dominated faculties.
The Social Why: Women are significantly more likely to stick with ICT when the curriculum is application-oriented. Linking code to sustainability, health, or social innovation makes the abstract “tech” meaningful.
The Industry Bridge: Structured collaborations between universities and companies (internships and industry-led workshops) help students visualize a concrete future, reducing the “uncertainty tax” that often leads to dropouts.
3. Professional Life: From Projects to Policy
In the workplace, the strongest enabler is Institutional Anchoring. If gender equality is just a “side project” or a “diversity month” initiative, it will fail. It must be embedded in the organization’s DNA.
Inclusive Leadership: It is time to challenge the “24/7 availability” culture. Leadership models that are compatible with caregiving responsibilities don’t just help women; they create a healthier environment for everyone.
Accountability: Moving from formal compliance to substantive accountability via Gender Equality Plans ensures that gender balance is a formal objective, not a polite suggestion.
A Note on Mentoring: Across all levels, mentoring remains a 4/5 rated strategy in Italy. However, the role of the mentor evolves: for a 12-year-old, the mentor is a cheerleader; for a university student, a navigator; and for a professional, a sponsor who opens doors to leadership.
The “software” of gender bias is deep-coded into our social structures. To overwrite it, we must move beyond short-term interventions. We need long-term networks, interdisciplinary education, and a radical shift in how we define “leadership.”
