Some Statistics

Women comprise 46.5% of the US labor force.

Women currently earn more than one-half of bachelors and masters degrees in the U.S., 57.3% and 58.5% respectively.

According to the U.S.  Census Bureau, as of 1999 women made up 45.1% of the managerial and executive workforce.  In 1989 the number reported was 32.4%.  (Catalyst 2000).  There are statistics that indicate this percentage increased to over 50% in 2003

Women hold 15.7% of the corporate officer positions in Fortune 500 companies, up from 8.5% in 1996 (Catalyst 2000).

Women and men are hired in equal proportions for entry-level positions.  However, women hold less that 10% of the senior level positions and even less of the very top leadership positions (Financial Times).

On average for every $1.00 a man makes a woman brings home $0.77 (Bureau of Labor Statistics).

Catalyst, a research firm focused on women in the workforce, conducted a study of 353 Fortune 500 companies between 1996 and 2000.  The sample included a diverse group of 11 industries, including technology, manufacturing, healthcare, and energy.  The key finding indicated that the group of companies with the highest representation of women on their top management teams experienced better financial performance than the group of companies with the lowest women’s representation.  This finding holds for both financial measures analyzed:  Return on Equity (ROE), which is 35.1% higher, and Total Return to Shareholders (TRS), which is 34.0% higher.

In the 2001 Census of Women Board Directors of the Fortune 1000, Catalyst found that women now hold 12.4% of all board seats in the F500, up from 11.2% in 1999 and 10.9% of all board seats in the F1000, up from 10% in 1999. 

A study reported in Business Week found that women scored higher than men on measures of desired managerial behaviors (Sharpe 2000).
 

Recognizing the Differences

Legislation has made overt discrimination based on gender and ethnicity illegal yet discrepancies in compensation and promotion continue.  Statistics and research indicate that we live in a culture with very specific gender schemas.  These schemas make the success of women in leadership positions more difficult.  It’s also interesting that the majority of people in cited studies believe that there is much more fair opportunity than there actually is.  This means that the prevailing culture is unfavorable to women in leadership positions AND most people (both men and women) DO NOT believe this is true:

A central problem for American women is the lack of consensus that there is a significant problem.  Gender inequalities in leadership opportunities are pervasive; perceptions of inequality are not.  A widespread assumption is that barriers have been coming down, women have been moving up, and equal treatment is an accomplished fact.  Two-thirds of surveyed men and three-quarters of male business leaders do not believe that women encounter significant discrimination for top positions in business, the professions, or government.

Such views are hard to square with the facts.  Although women have made enormous progress over the last several decades, they remain underrepresented at the top and overrepresented at the bottom in both the public and private sectors.

Differences in Biology drawn from work leading up to The Tending Instinct, Women, Men and the Biology of Our Relationships by Shelley E. Taylor (2002)

Until this study was published, scientists generally believed that when people experience stress, they trigger a hormonal cascade that revs the body to either stand and fight or flee as fast as possible, explains Laura Cousin Klein, PhD., now an Assistant Professor of Bio-behavioral Health at Penn State University and one of the study’s authors.  It’s an ancient survival mechanism left over from the time we were chased across the planet by saber-toothed tigers.

Now the researchers suspect that women have a larger behavioral repertoire than just fight or flight; in fact, says Dr. Klein, it seems that when the hormone oxytocin is released as part of the stress responses in a woman, it buffers the fight or flight response and encourages her to tend children and gather with other women instead.  When she actually engages in this tending or befriending, studies suggest that more oxytocin is released, which further counters stress and produces a calming effect.

We would make a distinction between the immediate threat and the more ongoing stress that follows.  In our experience, men and women respond similarly to the initial threat (fight, flee, freeze, or appease).  We also notice that women will “tend and befriend” once the immediate threat has been dealt with consistent with Taylor’s work.

Explaining the Advancement of Women in Organizations

Drawn from Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women, by Virginia Valian (1999)

The differences between men and women can be described as sex differences; related to our biology; and gender differences which highlight the psychological and social concepts that we find in our culture.  Gender refers to our ideas about how men and women are expected to behave.  The term includes the behaviors, traits and perceptions of men and women.  The masculine and feminine characteristics modeled and learned.

Research indicates that these learned traits and our perceptions of what it means to be male or female have more to do with women’s advancement in the workforce than whether we are biologically equipped for various tasks.

We evaluate women and men differently.  Studies show that there is a perception that exists in all of us that women in general have fewer of the abilities needed to be successful professionals than men do.  Even when women have identical qualifications to a man’s they will be seen as less competent.

Studies of managers suggest that both subordinates and supervisors can recognize the high achievements of women however in the eyes of their supervisors women’s’ success may be attributed to other factors, such as hard work, rather than their abilities.

Men and women are held to different standards of politeness, attractiveness.  Women must be polite in all situations where men are excused from social niceties when in positions of authority.  Being feminine is seen as a factor of incompetence and since attractiveness is related to femininity attractive physical appearance can be a hindrance for women.

When women actively adopt an assertive leadership style they are perceived more negatively than men.

When women attempt to be leaders they lose, relative to men, in three steps.  First they are attended to less; they have more difficulty than men do in gaining and keeping the floor.  Second, when women do speak and behave like leaders, they receive negative reactions from their cohorts, even when content and manner of their presentations are identical to men’s.  Third, even observers with no overt bias are affected by negative reactions to women leaders and to go along with the group judgment.

We have a different interpretation of success and failure for men than women.
Studies show that our perceptions about men tell us they are task oriented and we expect them to do well and we see their performance as better than it actually is.  Our perceptions of women tell us that they are nurturing, expressive, and communal, and we judge their professional performance as worse than it actually is. 

The differences, even small ones, in expectations and evaluations of women have a cumulative affect.  Over time very small differences in treatment can, as they pile up, result in large disparities in salary, promotion and prestige.  Even minor instances of group bias can add up to major inequities.

Drawn from Do Women Lack Ambition by Anna Fels, Harvard Business Review, April 2004

Although Women are no longer denied access to training in most types of careers, they have come up against what seems to be an even more powerful barrier to their ambitions.  In both the public and private spheres, white, middle class women are facing the reality that in order to be seen as feminine, they must provide or relinquish resources – including recognition – to others.  It is difficult for women to confront and address the unspoken mandate that they subordinate needs for recognition to those of others – particularly men.  The expectation is so deeply rooted in the culture’s ideals of femininity that it is largely unconscious.

Drawn from Standing at the Crossroads, Next Steps for High-Achieving Women,
by Marian Ruderman and Patricia Ohlott

Negative perceptions about women exist under the surface and generally are not recognized or may even be denied.  Our lack of awareness gives us little to do about our situation and we may even believe that the reason for being treated differently is deserved – that somehow we are at fault.

It turns out that both the formal and tacit organizational career-advancement systems have been based on the ideal of the married male manager.  In an article in the Harvard business Review, Debra Meyerson and Joyce Fletcher (2000) develop the idea that organizations have been created for men on the basis of men’s experience and ideals.  They see gender inequity as a characteristic of modern organizations in which a particular view of masculinity shapes the culture and norms.  According to this view, the organization prioritizes work above all else, emphasizes individual achievement and competition, and defines success in terms of financial rewards.

Different Conversational Rituals drawn from Talking 9 to 5, Women and Men at Work, by Deborah Tannen (1994)

Deborah Tannen, in her book Talking from 9 to 5, points out how our different ways of speaking can cause negative perceptions in the workplace and be barriers to advancement.  She observes:

A diverse group of people, with their own ideas, come together to get a job done.  Not everyone’s ideas can be taken up and individual styles and how their styles interact with each other’s are as influential as the quality of the ideas themselves.  Furthermore in addition to getting the job done, people are getting credit (or not getting credit) for their contributions to the outcome.
And
… begin with the realization that when people come together and talk in groups the results are influenced as much be the working of conversational style as by the power of ideas they being to the table.  Understanding and allowing for style differences should allow more truly powerful ideas to emerge – in meetings as well as in other workplace conversations.

Tannen’s research reveals that when women speak they are less direct than men.  Indirectness is often perceived as manipulative and shows insecurity and powerlessness.  While women may be looking for agreement and collaboration, the perception is that they don’t have opinions or can’t take a stand.

According to Tannen, women’s tendency to apologize for things not their responsibility, ask for other’s opinions before expressing their own, and deliver criticism too softly can undermine how others view their competency and authority.

Additionally women are less likely than men to “blow their own horn” Tannen attributes this to a woman’s view of the importance of a congenial work environment.

Women focus on connection vs. status.  This shows up in a number of ways.  One is that women tend to downplay their authority while exercising it.  This is a conversational ritual that keeps everyone on an equal footing, at least as far as appearances are concerned.  Women will expend effort to assure others they are not pulling rank, not trying to capitalize on or rub in their one-up position.  Tannen explains that men’s conversational rituals have grown out of the assumption that all relationships are inherently hierarchical, therefore they see less reason to downplay their authority. 

Observations about men and women working together – drawn from Male & Female Realities by Joe Tannenbaum (1989 )

Note: Tannenbaum use the distinctions “male” and “female;” we think “masculine” and “feminine” are more appropriate terms, and that men and women will recognize themselves with both types of characteristics.

Men always deal with objective reality first.

The male approach to teamwork is that each person has a separate, independent function (exclusive), and the game is more important than its individual participants.

Men gauge good teamwork by how little the team members have to talk to each other.

The female approach to teamwork is that the team has a purpose and each member is dependent on the other (inclusive); the individual participant is more important than the game, and communication is a critical factor.

Men and women are usually more at ease with their own gender unless they have been reared in a very dominant opposite-gender household.

Men are generally rated as more credible by both men and women, even if women have better credentials.

Nonverbal communication can sometimes alter negative preconceptions regarding race and/or gender identification.
When seeking a place in management, less attractive women actually had a significant edge over their more attractive peers.

The differing idealized physiques – thin for women, muscular for men – influence gender stereotyping in the workplace.

The more freedom a woman has, the more expressive she will be in her choice of fabrics, colors, and style.

One of the factors contributing to earnings gaps is a result of discrimination against the “clustering” of women in certain occupations.

Professionals and managers are more committed to their work than blue-collar workers, but in both groups, there are more committed women than men.

A woman’s greatest problem is often to manage others’ reactions to change, not her own.

Women smile more than men, and in business interactions, a smile may invite interruptions and is often seen as a sign of submission.

Women are more likely to approach problems qualitatively (inclusively), while men prefer quantitative measurements (exclusive).

Women who interact comfortably and easily with the aggressive humor of men in business are far likelier to succeed than women who negatively interpret male humor.

Men approach problems:

• Sequentially
• In a focused way (using one idea at a time)
• By imposing limitations (preset rules and regulations)

Women can approach problems in the same manner as men, but have the added advantage of being able to approach problems

• Asequentially (using random information and ideas without the slow process of sequencing)
• In an unfocused way (being able to handle more than one idea at a time and actually being able to deal with two or more problems simultaneously)
• Without imposing limitations (ignoring preset rules and regulations, real or imagined)