The American dream is built on the notion that the US is a meritocracy. Americans accept success in life and business can be earned by anyone accommodating to put in the hard work all-important to accomplish it, or so they say.

Thus, Americans frequently accept that those who are acknowledged deserve to be so and those who aren’t are appropriately admirable of their fate – admitting growing affirmation that addition inequalities in income, wealth, labor, and gender play a major role in who makes it and who doesn’t.

And this very fact – that Americans accept their association is a meritocracy – is the better threat to equality, decidedly when it comes to gender, as analysis by myself and others shows.

The acceptation of ‘meritocracy’

Gender asperity is common in American society.

Women in the US abide to acquaintance gender bias, sexual harassment, and little advance in affiliation to candid wages. Top positions in government and the business sector remain stubbornly male.

At the same time, 75 percent of Americans say they accept in meritocracy. This belief persists admitting affirmation that we tend to use it to explain accomplishments that bottle the status quo of gender bigotry rather than about-face it.

This myth is so powerful, it influences our behaviors.

‘Work harder’

Entrepreneurship is an area where the myths and realities of the American meritocracy come to a head.

In the US, women own 39 percent of all abreast owned businesses but accept only around 4 percent of adventure basic funding. Put addition way, male-led ventures accept 96 percent of all funding.

Yet the meritocracy myth, which my analysis shows has a bastion in the world of entrepreneurship, means that women are consistently told that all they have to do to get more of that $22 billion or so in adventure basic allotment is make better pitches or be more assertive.

The acceptance is that women aren’t trying hard enough or doing the right things to get ahead, not that the way adventure capitalists offer allotment is itself unfair.


‘Pipeline’ problem

Another account for the lack of allotment for women is pinned on the “pipeline” problem. That is, women just aren’t absorbed in the fields that form the courage of the industry – science, technology, engineering, and math.

Thus, if more women entered STEM fields, there would be more women entrepreneurs, and more money would flow to them. Pipeline explanations assume that there are no obstacles preventing women from acceptable entrepreneurs in technology.

Yet, we know the adverse is true. According to technology historian Marie Hicks and her book “Programmed Inequality,” women in tech were pushed out by men.

Research I’ve conducted with administration assistant Susan Clark Muntean on administrator abutment organizations, such as accelerators, shows that they often engage in beat and application approach that account men rather than women. This is added accurate by survey data from Techstars, one of the best-known and admired tech accelerators in the world. About 4 in 5 companies that have gone through their programs are white and almost 9 in 10 are male.

‘Gender-neutral’ myth

And yet these tech accelerators are guided by an absolute compassionate that gender-neutral beat and application practices rather than targeted ones will bring in the “best” people. This notion is often bidding as “Our doors are open to everyone” to announce that they do not discriminate.

Ironically, many organizations in the tech sector adopt this idea because they accept it is gender-neutral and, thus, unbiased.

Yet claiming to be gender-neutral prevents organizations from acquainted that their practices are absolutely biased. Most beat and application takes place through word-of-mouth, alumni referrals and claimed networks of accelerator leadership, which are predominantly composed of males.

These approaches often bring in more of the same: white male entrepreneurs rather than assorted professionals. As a result, women do not have equal access to assets in ambitious ecosystems.

And all this is admitting the fact that data on allotment show venture-backed tech startups with women at the helm beat those led by men.

Being ‘gender-aware’

The first step to analytic this botheration is for tech startups, investors, and accelerators to apprehend that what they call meritocracy is in fact itself gender-biased and after-effects in mostly white men accepting access to assets and funding. By continuing to accept in meritocracy and advancement practices associated with it, gender adequation will remain a abroad goal.

The next step is to move away from gender-neutral approaches and instead adopt “gender-aware,” proactive measures to change unfair practices. This includes ambience accurate goals to accomplish gender balance, analytical the gender agreement of boards, committees and other affecting groups in the organization, and assessing the tools and channels used for outreach, application and abutment of entrepreneurs.

The return on advance in gender adequation is clear: acknowledging and advance in businesses started by half the world’s citizenry will create advancing societies and acceptable economies. And it starts with male allies who want to be part of the band-aid and admit that meritocracy, as association currently defines it, isn’t the way to go.The Conversation

Read next: This $41 course amalgamation can get you hired as a back-end web developer