I still vividly remember how it all started. Four women were grouped together as “technologists” and tasked with completing the Diversity and Inclusion Certificate Program (DICP) capstone project. I’d like to believe that fate brought the four of us together. I was excited, invigorated, and full of ideas. Initially, I pitched the idea of hosting a "Women in Tech" podcast to highlight the experiences of women in the tech space. But, as we brainstormed together, an unmet need began to unfold. We noticed that there wasn’t a platform at UCSF to bring together women in technology to share ideas, learnings, skills, opportunities for innovation, and ultimately, to help one another navigate this ecosystem. I knew immediately that implementing a pilot program would be a bigger undertaking, but I was drawn to this bold vision. With three other strong women beside me, nothing seemed too big of a challenge. What started as a daunting DICP capstone experiment turned out to be one of the most rewarding experiences of my life.
Clockwise from top left: Panelists Kay Burke, Sara Murray, Shannon Weber, Kevin Souza, and Pranathi Sundaram; event materials and WIT@UCSF logo buttons; Kat Li and Sarah Ngo at booth; audience members at the panel discussion; Rosemary Yau, Clarice Estrada, Alyssa Tecklenburg, Ana Buenaventura, Sarah Ngo, and Suria Sadat at booth; Jenica Cimino and Sarah Ngo at booth.
On Thursday, October 10th, WIT@UCSF held a panel discussion on gender equity in technology at the UCSF Sharecase conference at Mission Bay.
We convened five speakers, Kay Burke, Sara Murray, Kevin Souza, Pranathi Sundaram, and Shannon Weber, from areas like informatics, governance, and management who were in a diverse range of roles and vantage points within our organization. They discussed topics including recruiting a diverse group of employees, how to support professional development of people who are underrepresented in technology, and using the lens of diversity and inclusion to inform decision-making about technology development and deployment. About 60 people attended the session and about half stayed for the accompanying mixer that was immediately after.
With prime real estate in the main exhibit hall, we also had a booth where we connected with…
I do not know how to code. The languages I know are Spanish, French (both clumsily), and English (less clumsily), not JavaScript or Python. Can I set up a server or trouble shoot network issues? Only if you want more issues. Do I consider myself a technical person? That’s a complicated question.
At what point does one consider oneself “technical?” And what does that even mean? I recently attended the UCTech Conference in Santa Barbara and attended a Women in Tech panel in which the Associate CIO at UC Davis, Meggan Levitt said something that resonated with me:
“The word ‘technical’ was used against me in my early career to single me out as an employee without a STEM degree and somehow less deserving of the term. I decided right then to build a computer from scratch (without YouTube!) to prove to myself that a Spanish major can be technical too! Now, as a manager and leader in my organization, I know there are many paths to becoming technical—libraries, teaching and finance for example. I welcome employees that can learn new technologies to solve problems; now employees that can partner with vendors, define requirements, and change business processes are the ‘technical’ ones.”
My entire career I’ve spent following my curiosity about technology, trying to understand what it can do to improve business processes. To me, “technical” always felt like something I would never be because I wasn’t tinkering with the metaphorical and literal nuts and bolts of a system. But with that reframing of what technical can mean, I instantly became a technical person. I saw the skills I’ve developed,…
Technology is an all-encompassing word that can mean many different things depending on who you ask. In healthcare, it could mean new radiological imaging machines or robots that deliver food to patients. One omnipresent piece of technology is the electronic health record (EHR). UCSF uses a software system called Epic as it’s EHR, as do many other hospitals. It is a complex application that is the center of many policy discussions. At UCSF we have many researchers who use EHR data but only a handful who study the EHR itself and its impact on health care delivery and outcomes. I was able to sit down with one such researcher, Julia Adler-Milstein, PhD, who is the Director of the Center for Clinical Informatics and Improvement Research, to learn more about her role in helping shape the national discussion and her own experience as a researcher who studies how clinicians interact with technology and the related policy issues. The interview is lightly edited for clarity and length.
How would you describe what you do in 30 seconds?
I would say first and foremost I'm a researcher and I try to create evidence that helps guide both federal policy makers and practitioners, which in this case would be hospitals and other health care delivery organizations, about how to make best use of their digital tools to improve health outcomes, providers satisfaction and all the other outcomes a high functioning health system would achieve.