Funny how, in when I was getting my Computer Science degree, maybe 90% or more of the people my classes were MALE. The ratio these days might be a little lower. But not all that much.

So what this article is arguing is that FEMALES need to be parachuted into IT from some other background so as to head up these teams (still probably mostly MALE, as you often need some fairly specific technical skills to work on some of these teams). 

So are we left with the paradox of teams of mostly MALES working away on support or project teams for years and years, but being given a pat on the head and being told, "There, there, you just keep doing your job. You're doing fine. So you don't have to worry about being promoted ..." while FEMALES come in from other areas to supervise them and move up into more senior roles? 

btw, having a manager who really has "never gotten her hands dirty" in the field isn't usually a recipe for success. 

Why does the G&M keep publishing these garbage articles?