Workplace Communication

Tech Bros and Tech Woes: A Perspective on Gendered Sociolinguistics in the Tech Industry

Jenny Wang, Madhavi Vivek, Rajana Chhin, Audrey Chung

In the expanding realm of technology, language serves as more than just a communication tool — it is a powerful marker of identity and belonging. Our study delves into gendered linguistic practices within the tech industry, focusing on “tech bro” culture and its impact on female experience and career advancement in this male-dominated field. Through interviews with male and female tech students and analysis on social media content, podcasts, and scholarly articles, we uncovered lexical variations and interactional patterns unique to the tech community. Utilizing a blend of qualitative and quantitative methods, we observed terms like “tech debt,” distinct pitch variations, and exaggerated “urban” accents during conversation. Our findings reveal that females in tech often adapt their language to conform to the hyper-masculine expectations of the tech workplace, further reinforcing clear gender biases and stereotypes within the industry. By highlighting these subtle linguistic barriers that perpetuate gender biases, we aim to emphasize the need for a more inclusive and supportive tech environment for all individuals.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction and Background

The technology industry has long been known for its clear gender gap, given its predominantly male sector enforcing stereotypes and biases against women in the workplace. Despite advancements over the years, the tech industry still exhibits pervasive gender bias, often manifested through language. Recently, the term “tech bro” has been used to characterize the toxic masculinity prevalent in the workplace (Jones 2022). Our research aims to explore the unique lexicon and interactional patterns of this group, observing how they reinforce gender stereotypes and impact female experience in tech. In other words, how does the dense network of “tech bros” correlate to their use of vernacular variables? Does gender bias exist within language commonly used by “tech bros?”

Existing literature highlights the significant role of gendered language — the words and phrases that inherently carry gender bias—in shaping workplace dynamics. For instance, terms like “chairman” and “assertive” often assume a male subject, whereas words like “bossy” and “hysterical” are typically applied to females in leadership roles (Holmes 2008). Holmes’ study suggests that women in tech adopt more masculine speech patterns to gain respect and authority, such as using direct imperatives when commanding subordinates or purposefully disengaging from workplace arguments. Despite the growing awareness of these issues, there remains a gap in understanding the specific linguistic behaviors of “tech bros” and their effects on female colleagues.

Our hypothesis claims that the linguistic practices of “tech bros” do contribute to the exclusion of women from the tech sector. This exclusion manifests in daily communication, feedback, perception of qualifications, and performance evaluations. Our research aims to find out whether the male-dominated environment serves as a barrier to community entry and inclusion for women. Additionally, we aim to study the speech variation between genders within the community and its role in building professional relationships. By analyzing tech jargon and interactional patterns, we hope to uncover the subtle and pervasive barriers that gendered language creates in promoting workplace gender equality and diversity.

Methods

In order to conduct our research, our team relied on three main methods for data collection:

  1. Media: We collected quotes from social media portrayals of the stereotypical “tech bro”.
  2. Online Tech Hubs: We gathered data from popular tech communities on platforms like Discord and cross-referenced jargon with scholarly articles.
  3. Interviews: We conducted a total of three sets of interviews with male and female identifying students in the tech industry in order to evaluate of indexical shift as well as gendered language.

Going in order, we consistently evaluated new information against previous data. Further analysis included examining the spectrograms of interview snippets for distinct phonological features.

Results and Analysis

The following section will focus on the results of our study.

1. Media

As per our methodology, one of our primary sources of information was through the portrayal of stereotypical “tech bros” on social media. While this type of content is not the most scientific, it does provide context on societal expectations placed on the average “tech bro.” The comedic video linked here demonstrates several “tech bro” characteristics while mocking common stereotypes, such as remote work culture, cost-of-living in the Bay Area, and popular hobbies and vacation spots within tech communities. Additionally, we observed that the creator of the video speaks with an exaggerated coastal urban accent, similar to those of surfers or “frat bros.” This hyper-masculine accent underscores the inherently masculine nature of “tech bro” culture and serves as a starting point for developing a hypothesis surrounding the existence of a gender gap reflected in language.

2. Online Tech Hubs

Our team visited popular internet communities within the tech industry. The following quotes were taken from a popular Discord server called cscareers.dev, which is a community for student developers seeking internship and new grad opportunities in tech with over 8000 members.

Figure 1. Pictures from a conversation on Discord server cscareers.dev.

From these quotes in Figure 1, we gather that there is a linguistic overlap between tech communities and gamer communities. This would make sense as demographically, they are both male dominated, and technology and gaming share many similarities as fields and industries. Specific jargon like “jank” to describe an interviewer of poor quality and “cracked” to describe extremely accomplished people are two examples of somewhat-expected buzzwords. According to Wiktionary, the term “jank” exists as both computing slang and video game slang, though it is rarely used in technical contexts. The usage of this term colloquially shows the adoption of computing and gamer slang in broader environments. In the same vein, “cracked,” which usually carries video gaming implications, being used to express skill levels outside of gaming also shows the adaptive nature of the jargon.

3. Interview: Indexical Shift

Our first interview was conducted with Brandon and Brian, both third-year cognitive science students at UCLA. Brandon is a product manager intern, and Brian is a software engineering intern. Because the two have an established friendship, I conducted the interview with both participants present to simulate as natural of a conversation as possible. The interview was split into first, a professional chat, and second, a casual conversation in order to evaluate for indexical shifts. Throughout the professional chat, I asked Brian and Brandon questions about their experiences in tech through their professional organizations at UCLA. The following is a transcription of a snippet of the conversation:

Brian: Ensuring like, there’s not a lot of tech debt, I think is like super important across all the projects within DevX as a whole makes everything run very smoothly and there’s no churn.

Brandon: Yeah yeah, for sure. I think that’s a huge thing too, for a lot of projects, is because people are bouncing. Um, people bounce from projects all the time, um having tech debt is just like absolutely horrendous because like people who don’t know anything about the project, for lack of a better term, like a shitload of…

For the casual conversation, I asked the participants to describe updates in their lives, as well as share gossip, as if we were catching up. This is in order to establish the most natural and comfortable environment.

Brandon: ‘Cause I remember, I had- there was something about- but anyway, I saw them together, like they were like, like homies, like they were like, headed to a party together. I was like “oh, like birds of a feather” you know? Shit, like that tracks, that hella tracks, you know? Like I’m not surprised.

Brian: That’s wild.

Generally, I noticed that participants, especially Brandon, deliberately talked slower during the professional chat. During the casual conversation, I found that Brandon tended to stutter more, as well as exhibit doubling in order to emphasize certain phrases. In the professional chat, instead of doubling phrases, he slowed down and replaced those instances with filler words.

Tech jargon was noticeably present during the professional chat, including words like:

  • Tech debt: shortcuts in code that achieve the goal faster, but at the cost of uglier, harder-to-maintain code.
  • Churn: the frequent change of resources or team members within a project.
  • Bounce (rate): the rate at which people leave or exit, typically used in the context of webpage visits.

The following spectrograms closely examine Brandon’s use of the word “shit” in both the casual and professional context.

Figure 2. Spectrogram of Brandon’s use of “shit” in a casual conversation.
Figure 3. Spectrogram of Brandon’s use of the word “shit” in a professional conversation.

Here, we can see that during the casual conversation, there is a significant increase in pitch towards the end of the word, indicating a high rising terminal, which can be especially common amongst young people. In the spectrogram for the same word used in a professional context, Brandon maintains the same pitch. This is likely because a high rising terminal is not situationally acceptable in all professional settings. For example, it is usually not encouraged during job interviews. We can gather that a “tech bro” like Brandon understands this and subconsciously omits high rising terminal in professional contexts.

4. Interview: Gender and Culture

Our second interview was conducted with Jiin Kim, a fourth year Linguistics and Computer Science major who has experience as a software engineer through her internship at Microsoft. As she explained tech-specific language throughout the interview, she defined them in layman’s terms, constantly checking to assure my comprehension of the terms as an outsider to the tech sector. She mentioned how it can be hard to feel included entirely when there is a linguistic barrier made of tech jargon and expressions that often feel very exclusive and not easily accessible to be understood. She herself felt intimidated as an incomer into an established tech workspace. Linguistically, she found herself assimilating into the culture by reflecting speech patterns of those around her—particularly those superior to her. If she finds them to speak more directly, using imperatives, she herself would do the same. Even through a digital space, if she noticed someone using more emoticons in their messages, she would reflect that frequency. As a woman in the tech space, she attributes her not having much experience with discrimination or feeling out of place with the changing ages. As a young college student in an internship program seeking to give more opportunities to a diverse group of tech-workers, she felt well-supported by her company and her peers.

Our last interview was conducted with Matt Nieva, a fourth year Computer Science and Engineering major with experience as the Development Team Director for ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) at UCLA and as a software engineering intern at Cisco. Throughout his interview, he went deep into tech jargon, throwing out multiple technical words while describing tech projects in–depth. When asked about why tech-bro culture revolves so heavily around a specific tech lexicon, he responded saying that tech-jargon is perceived as proof of expertise.  There is a certain linguistic exclusivity that makes those who use it hold more authority and credibility. These common words in tech-space also seep into his daily vocabulary as well, signifying to others that he is a member of this tech-bro community.

These are words such as:

  • Bandwidth: the energy or mental capacity required to deal with a situation
  • Parallelize: a programming term to adapt a program for running on a parallel processing term
    • This however can be used in daily life as setting two thing simultaneously in motion
  • Velocity: rate of progress; a metric for work that has been done

In efforts to assimilate, he, like Jiin, would mimic the linguistic patterns of those around him. He discovered the concept of downtalking versus uptalking—downtalking being lower in pitch and making a speaker sound more assertive, and uptalking being higher in pitch and making a speaker sound less credible. One reason why downtalking could be perceived as more respectable might be that it is, based on pitch, masculine indexing, while the other is more feminine indexing.

Discussion and Conclusion

As mentioned in the background, tech-bro culture is characterized by an informal, male-centric atmosphere that often perpetuates gender discriminatory behavior and aids in maintaining the gender gap in the tech industry. The establishment of Title IX in 1972 was a turning point for the number of women in STEM, but women still face the leftover effects of this gender power dynamic now in more covert ways. This inequality is visible in how more masculine indexing ways of leadership such as authoritative/assertive styles that assert hierarchical status difference is perceived as more valid of leadership than leading in what is considered more feminine indexing ways such as facilitating group discussion.

Beyond perceived leadership and professionalism, research has found that gender comes to play even within the informal discourse at the workplace. Small talk is a core strategy to foster team and build rapport; however it is culturally coded as feminine specifically when it is not about anything that is work related or distinctly masculine. Research showed that at a female workplace, these pre-meeting talks would last longer and delve into topics such as family, beauty, healthcare, while when studying three different New Zealand IT organizations, small talk was either non-agenda work related or about sports. This may sound trivial but interpersonal discourse is key in fostering work relationships and an overall culture. This difference is visible in humor as well, where a female boss might make a self-deprecating joke to reestablish good relations with her subordinates, workplaces that were more masculine in one meeting  consisted of humor that 90% of was sarcastic or negative jibes intended to deflate the addresses. Gender hierarchy in the workplace, particularly within the linguistic space, is covert and embedded subtly into the ways we talk, the ways we perceive authority, etc.

Our findings indicate that the sociolinguistics of the tech industry have unique qualities, including those of which have an effect on the perception of male and female individuals that work in tech. As a male-dominated field, gender bias is highly prevalent in the industry. Our aim was to strengthen this claim in which this bias is confirmed and correlated to female “success” (defined as experience and career advancement), via the exploration of the pattern of language adaptation by females to male tech industry speech. Through this study, we found that the perpetuation of this gender bias is tied to the inherent gender gap that this industry creates in that a male-dominated environment contributes to female exclusion and strict gender-based hierarchy. Our research indicates that this exclusion and hierarchy contributes to the barrier against female success in male-dominated fields such as the tech industry. The continued observation of male-dominated power structures can aid in the effort for people of all genders in high-earning fields. There is thus a need for collective action toward increasingly inclusive, supportive, and sustainable workplace environments, especially the tech industry, for female-identifying people and other minority individuals.

 

References

Duchene, A., & Heller, M. (2012). Language in late capitalism: Pride and profit. Routledge.

Gleeson, P. (2017). Working with Coders. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-2701-5.

Holmes, Janet. Gendered Discourse at Work , 2 Apr. 2008, onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00063.x/abstract.

Ignatow, G. (2003). “Idea hamsters” on the “Bleeding edge.” Poetics, 31(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-422x(02)00042-6.

Jones, H., & Sudlow, B. (2022). A contemporary history of Silicon Valley as global heterotopia: Silicon Valley metaphors in the French news media. Globalizations, 19(7), 1122–1136.

Moldovan, Andrei. “Technical Language as Evidence of Expertise.” MDPI, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 21 Feb. 2022, www.mdpi.com/2226-471X/7/1/41.

https://www.ucats.org/a-closer-look-at-gender-diversity-in-tech-departments-across-the-usa.html

miinii (@officialmiinii). (2024) “women in computer science stand up!” https://www.tiktok.com/@officialmiinii/video/7342179255356230955.

Tripathi, Pooja (@winnie_thepooj). (2024) “POV: date with a tech bro” https://www.tiktok.com/@winnie_thepooj/video/6962561340086996230?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc&web_id=7279640957828630062.

Nasso, Austin (@austinnasso). (2024) “POV: you’re talking to a tech bro” https://youtube.com/shorts/qmGL0-U2Z58?si=DAulz7gNkYjYpRVH.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/jank#Etymology.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cracked

[/expander_maker]

, , , , ,

InterGen Connect: Bridging the Communication Gap Between Generations in the Workforce

Roksana Kohansedgh, Ryan Kolaini, Melissa Mehrabifar, Shawhin Sahabi

Working in a professional environment, online communication can be challenging, particularly across generations. After exploring Generation Z (1997-2012) and Baby Boomers (1946-1964), we hypothesized that they have undeniably different styles of communication that lead to misunderstandings and inefficiencies in the workforce. Baby Boomers typically prefer email communication and phone calls, while Generation Z highly prefers the use of informal, digital communication through social media and text message. Using our own methods, we analyzed this research by conducting a study at a law office, surveying 20 employees including both genders, aged 18-27 and 60-69. With the use of existing research, a background was introduced to gather data on why exactly these generations prefer a certain style of communication. Delving into the findings of our own research, the results were apparent: Boomers prefer formal language and traditional communication platforms, whereas Generation Z leans towards a relaxed approach, using slang and emojis. This generational difference showed the inefficiency in the ability to communicate effectively with one another in the discussion section. Finally, in order to bridge the gap, implications and cross generational training were introduced in the conclusion to facilitate knowledge in communicating effectively between the two cohorts.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

Bounded by the demands of the modern workforce, mutual respect and collaboration is formed through effective communication. The research delves into two distinct groups, 10 Baby Boomers (aged 60-69) and 10 Generation Z (aged 18-27), collaborating in a law office. By analyzing and conducting our own research on their communication styles and patterns, their differences in communication through lexicality and formality are unveiled, and uncovers the misunderstandings of how the two cohorts communicate, ultimately aiming to resolve misunderstandings. This research is driven by its research question: How do communication styles differ among the two generations in the workforce, and what influences these variations within the workforce? By analyzing existing research as well as our own research, we aim to uncover the reasons behind their differences in communicating, as well as propose. This will help create a more inclusive and effective workplace where everyone can communicate smoothly and understand each other better.

Background

In society, Baby Boomers are known to have grown up in an era with limited technology, and therefore relying entirely on traditional communication methods. Viewing it as a sign of professionalism and authority, Baby Boomers value formality and directness when communicating. In an article by Jennifer (M.I) Loh, Jane Strachan and Raechel Johns, it is revealed that Baby Boomers preferred exemplifying a “professional” demeanor when communicating online in professional contexts. 80% of Baby Boomers revealed that they are more thorough with their grammar and overall language when texting their colleagues than when they text or email friends or family. (Loh, Strachan, & Johns p. 1522, 2021). This highlights their belief in holding a position of authority when in the workplace, unwilling to stray away from the traditional manner of communication. Conversely, the informality of communication that may seem unprofessional to the Baby Boomer generation, is seen as “direct” to Generation Z. Since Generation Z essentially grew up around the use of advanced technology, they are entirely comfortable with a plethora of online communication platforms, and prefer a more informal style of communication. In a study done by Bencsik Andrea, Horváth-Csikós Gabriella, and Juhász Tímea, the data depicted in a chart revealed that “The boundaries of work and entertainment overlap” (Bencsik, p. 95, 2016). The data is then further explained when it says that because they grow up around technology, Generation Z feels comfortable in a digital, less formal environment, permeating into their work lives. The abbreviations they use make for more of a direct and quick approach to communicating. (Bencsik, p. 93, 2016). The use of slang, like “lol” “and omg” are used in order to be more efficient and comfortable with their coworkers when communicating.

Methods

In order to effectively explore and investigate communicative differences between these two different generations, a mixed-methods study was conducted, analyzing both qualitative and quantitative data. In terms of qualitative data, we conducted a study with 20 employees from a law office, consisting of 10 Baby Boomers (aged 60-69) and 10 employees from Generation Z (aged 18-27) on a google form survey. Narrowing in our research, we examined each cohort’s communicative styles, online preferences for communication platforms, formality, and use of slang. The survey tested their comfortability with certain online communication platforms through close-ended questions, and asked open-ended questions on how they would personally respond to emails and text messages, monitoring their slang, formality, or lack thereof. Additionally, it is important to note that, to avoid bias, we collected data on age and gender at the end of the survey.

Results and Analysis

In terms of the analysis and results of the data, it revealed a significant difference in generational communication style, contributing to the various difficulties communicating across generations.

QUALITATIVE INSIGHTS:

Our qualitative insights revealed that Baby Boomers emphasize formality and proper grammar, viewing it as a sign of professionalism and authority. The apparent Baby Boomer showed a more formal, authoritative approach. As shown in both examples, full sentences, proper punctuation, and directness is used. Within our qualitative insights, we observed distinct differences in the use of language and formality. (See Image one and two)

In Image two, it is shown how Generation Z often uses slang and informal language in a given scenario, favoring brevity and efficiency over traditional formality. In contrast, in image one, the Baby Boomers’ use in formal language asserts their authoritativeness, allowing for a more traditional approach.

QUANTITATIVE INSIGHTS

The data in the chart shows a clear preference for communicative platforms between Generation Z and Baby Boomers. We focused on two different types of platforms of communication: email and instant messaging (like instagram, snapchat, and text message).

Baby Boomers use email for 80% of their professional communications, preferring its formal format. They use instant messaging for only 20%, due to its informal structure and their preference for traditional methods. In contrast, Generation Z uses email for only 30% of their communications, often when required. They prefer instant messaging, which makes up 70% of their workplace communications, valuing its efficiency and quick interactions.

DISCUSSION

Baby Boomers: The Formal Communicators

Baby boomers grew up in times of more face-to-face communication than virtual reality, and formal written communications were very popular. They associate formality with being professional and reliable. It comes; therefore, more naturally to them that they favor emails, formal meetings, and structured ways of communication. Their style of formal, direct lines of communication actually goes to make a point in the Baby Boomers’ favor—that professionalism lies in good punctuation and clear-sighted authority. As Venter (2017) states, “Baby Boomers communicate mostly using face-to-face communication, telephone conversations and e-mail. They will seldom use blogs, wikis, social networking sites and texting or instant messaging in more formal situations, such as in the work context.”

Generation Z: Digital Native

On the other hand, Generation Z was brought up on the internet and the digital means of communication, and therefore, they embrace the style of casual and instant communication. They prefer informal language that is rich in slang, dramatic expressions, and even emojis to express emotions. They prefer digital platforms more: social media and messaging applications for communication. This is mainly a representation of a world that is fast and interconnected, where it is important to be quick and efficient in communication.Taneja, Wu, and Edgerly (2018) highlight that “Generation Z prefers to communicate through more private social media platforms such as Snapchat and Whisper.”

Our study identifies the distinct communication styles of Baby Boomers and Generation Z, highlighting why misunderstandings occur in the workplace. Baby Boomers prefer formal, structured communication, while Generation Z favors informal, rapid styles, leading to potential friction. Subramaniam and Razak (2014) note, “There is also the element of interjection such as ‘la’, ‘ah’ and ‘lah’ in the posts; it shows the informal style of posts.” Understanding these preferences allows organizations to tailor strategies for a more inclusive environment.

CONCLUSION

When focusing on the communication gap between Baby Boomers and Generation Z, it is essential to scope the different aspects of intergenerational interaction in a cohesive and productive work environment. This research project reveals the different communication preferences and patterns of the two generations, and how each generation has many differences. When highlighting these differences, Baby Boomers prefer a more formal touch to their communication, whereas Generation Z drives towards convenience and simplicity through social media and messaging apps. These differences not only reflect the differences between the people born in those particular generations but also reflect how advancements in our society have played out.

Our research proposed implementing specific training protocols to address generational communication challenges, fostering empathy and reducing confusion. Programs like “Global Courseware” and “SkillPath” can create a healthy, transparent work environment with flexible communication. For example, combining email updates with instant messaging for quick follow-ups can help bridge communicative differences. These strategies enhance collaboration and understanding, creating a more inclusive workplace. Our research not only offered solutions to communication barriers but also fostered a healthier workplace, reflecting rapid technological advancements and improving productivity and job satisfaction.

Additionally, we provide links to relevant podcasts and news broadcasts that delve deeper into generational communication differences and strategies for effective workplace communication.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VicCUIEwpLk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KteUn6scFqE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LD8CZIUeDU

Acknowledgements

We thank the employees of the participating law office for their time and insights, and our academic advisors for their guidance and support in this research project.

By fostering an understanding of generational communication differences, we can create more effective and cohesive workplaces.

References

Bencsik, A., Juhász, T., & Horváth-Csikós, G. (2016). Y and Z Generations at Workplaces. Journal of Competitiveness, 6(3), 90–106. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2016.03.06

Loh, J. (M. I., Strachan, J., & Johns, R. (2021). How rude is rude: an exploratory study among Australian Millennials, Generation “X” and Baby Boomers mobile phone users. Behaviour & Information Technology, 40(14), 1516–1527. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2020.1764106

Subramaniam, V., & Razak, N. A. (2014). Examining language usage and patterns in online conversation: Communication gap among Generation Y and Baby Boomers. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 468–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.064

Taneja, H., Wu, A. X., & Edgerly, S. (2018). Rethinking the generational gap in online news use: An infrastructural perspective. New Media & Society, 20(5), 1792–1812. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817707348

Venter, E. (2017). Bridging the communication gap between generation Y and the baby boomer generation. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 22(4), 497-507. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2016.1267022

, , , , ,
Scroll to Top