What looks like Data is actually a System that shapes Societies

Apr 28
5 min read

In the middle of one of the world’s largest industrial fairs, I was asked 6 questions by the VDI e.V. (Verein Deutscher Ingenieure).

The task sounded easy: estimate the numbers. The twist? I had to justify every answer (in German, not my native language.)

My guesses landed surprisingly close to the real data. But what stayed with me wasn’t the accuracy. It was why those numbers felt right. Behind each estimate were patterns I’ve seen repeatedly along my professional career, colleagues, and friends. So I decided to break it down. One question at a time. One answer at a time. And the reasoning behind each.

1. Wie hoch ist der Anteil von Frauen in der Bevölkerung?

→ What is the proportion of women in the population?

≈ 51%

This wasn’t a random guess.

At some point, I began questioning what drives some leaders into war. One observation I came across, stayed with me: the shift in birth ratios after wars, the so-called “returning soldier effect.” It can be interpreted as biology responding to disruption. What’s interesting is this: even when systems are shaken, nature tends to rebalance.

2. Wie hoch ist der Anteil von Frauen im Ingenieurberuf heute?

→ What is the proportion of women in the engineering profession today?

≈ 21%

Both data and experience point to the same reality: engineering is still heavily male-dominated.

Early in my career in the U.S., while studying and working in architecture, I noticed the imbalance. When I took a minor in construction management, it became even clearer—I was often the only woman in the room for nearly two years. That wasn’t an exception. It was a pattern.

Being the only woman came with pressure. At times, even professors questioned whether I belonged there. While working full-time and studying part-time, I pushed myself to overperform, just to prove I was as capable as anyone else in the room.

3. Wie stark ist der Anteil von Frauen im Ingenieurberuf seit 2012 gestiegen?

→ How much has the proportion of women in engineering increased since 2012?

≈ 5.5%

There is progress. Staying connected with my former university, I’ve seen more women entering technical fields over time. In architecture, the shift is noticeable. In engineering, it’s there,-but slower.

Career choices are shaped by culture, access, education, and long-standing perceptions.

So yes, things are changing. But incrementally,- not at the pace of parity.

4. Wie viele Ingenieurinnen arbeiten in Teilzeit?

→ How many female engineers work part-time?

≈ 32%

This reflects how families organize responsibilities.

In many cases, one parent adjusts working hours during early childhood. Historically, this has more often been women. In many places, not long ago women had to ask for permission to open a bank account or even join the workforce.

Having lived across South America, the U.S., and Europe, I’ve seen how systems shape these decisions.

In the U.S., households often depend on two full-time incomes, with limited parental leave or job protection. Kids are often left to figure things out on their own. This may push for independence, but it also gives more room for making bad choices.
In Europe, stronger support systems (parental leave, job protection) create more flexibility, which can support a stronger early childhood foundation, and, in turn, a more stable adulthood.
In South America, grandparents often give a hand raising the kids while parents work. Omas Essen ist einfach das Beste! (Grandma's food is simply the best!)

These structural differences matter.

Research (OECD) shows that early parental involvement plays a key role in a child’s development,- cognitively and emotionally.

This goes beyond statistics.

Supporting parents in those early years is not just a family decision. It’s an investment in how individuals develop confidence, resilience, and decision-making skills later in life,- and ultimately in the kind of society we build.

→ A note on AI, and why this moment matters

We are entering a defining era with AI,- not only technologically, but socially.

AI will increase productivity. That’s certain. The real question is: what do we do with it?

If AI is used only to cut costs and replace jobs, we risk creating imbalance: fewer earn, fewer consume, weaker economies, more inequality, chaos.

But there is another path.

AI can amplify human capacity, -allowing people to work more efficiently in fewer hours while maintaining income and quality of life.

That creates something valuable: TIME, believe it or not our most valuable asset. Besides the longevity latest trial, our time is still limited.

Time for family. Time for development. Time to strengthen the foundations of society.

Across different systems, I’ve seen how economic pressure can push both parents into full-time work, leaving less space during key developmental years. I am not a mother by choice, but one doesn't necessarily have to bring kids to understand that a solid family foundation is the foundation of a whole nation, a system, a successful and stable system, or a society facing challenges like disconnection, reduced empathy, and social fragmentation.

AI can be more than a tool. It can be a lever to redesign how we live and work.

In Germany, institutions like the Job-Center provide a safety net,- but primarily for survival only, not far from the concept of an universal basic income.

So the opportunity is clear:

→ Not replacing humans → But reshaping work in a way that benefits society long-term considering the speed of this technology and our own adjustment.

Because one question remains in my head:

If fewer people participate economically, who sustains the future market?

Will there be a Market at all, or we will be living in a mega hightech feudalism?

AI should not reduce participation. It should expand it.

5. Wie viele männliche Ingenieure arbeiten in Teilzeit?

→ How many male engineers work part-time?

≈ 7%

This reflects long-standing patterns in how work and family responsibilities are distributed.

While more men are engaging in caregiving, the shift is still gradual,- especially in engineering.

This may change over time, particularly as new ways of working emerge and women are not longer subject only to the kitchen,- reason why I probably refused to learn cooking, until I understood that home-food is also a matter of health.

6. Wie hoch ist der Frauenanteil bei Patentanmeldungen?

→ What is the share of women in patent applications?

≈ 8%

This gap goes beyond participation. It’s also about visibility.

Growing up, we rarely learned about women inventors.

One example that changed my perspective:

Hedy Lamarr—known as a Hollywood actress—was also a pioneering technologist. She co-invented a frequency-hopping communication system (U.S. Patent, 1942), which later became the foundation for Wi-Fi, GPS, and Bluetooth. Yet most people only know her for her film career.

And she’s not alone:

Bertha Benz → proved the automobile viable
Melitta Bentz → reinvented coffee brewing
Katharina Paulus → advanced parachute design
Marga Faulstich → innovations in optical glass
Agnes Pockels → foundations of surface science
Lise Meitner → contributed to the discovery of nuclear fission
Ursula Keller (66) → pioneer in ultrafast laser physics
Christiane Nüsslein (86) → Nobelpreis → genetic control of embryonic develop.

Women have always contributed to innovation. They were just less visible, which limited their visibility as role models for future generations.

What looks like data is not just numbers. It reflects how we design: work, opportunity, and participation. If we want different outcomes, we have to design different systems.

AI will accelerate everything. The question is: in which direction? If we use it to replace people, we shrink society. If we use it to support people, we strengthen it. The choice is still ours.

Numbers don’t define reality. Systems do.