Why Real Progress Doesn’t Have a Face

,

woman typing on a laptopWhen it comes to women in top executive positions, nothing causes more upheaval than the threat of quotas that could push more women in. But the real threat is the quota that is already in place and not talked about – the quota that allows one woman in but is locking women in general out.

A new study by Cristian Dezső from the Robert H. Smith School of Business and two co-authors David Gaddis Ross and Jose Uribe from Columbia Business School found evidence of a hidden quota at work at the top inside of companies:

If a woman holds one of the top five executive positions at a company, the chances of a second woman joining the top executive ranks falls by 51%.

The culprit behind this hidden quota? The study, to be published in the Strategic Management Journal, could not discern whether this was conscious discrimination or unconscious bias at play. What’s clear however, is the outcome.

Lone Woman Up a Ladder

The researchers looked at the top five executive roles by compensation across 1,500 S&P firms over twenty years from 1991 to 2011, where top management positions held by women rose from 1.6% in 1992 to 5.8% in 2000 to a slower yet incline of 8.7% in 2011.

The authors found that when one woman had been promoted to the top executive ranks, she was not a key opening up executive offices for more women but more like a lock on the door.

The report states that “women in top management face an implicit quota, whereby a firm’s leadership makes an effort to have a small number of women on the top management team but makes less effort to have, or even resists having, larger numbers of women.”

The study conducted a simulated distribution analysis and compared it to actual distribution of top company executives. If one female executive opened the path for more, there would be lots of clustering. If she had no impact on other female appointments, there would be random distribution. Nope, neither were true.

What the researchers found was a “negative spillover” – the actual distribution of female top executives was isolated, repelling one another. In other words, most companies had only one, resulting in a fragmented female executive population.

As co-author Ross shared with The Huffington Post, “It’s like someone really carefully went around and put one woman on one top management team, and another woman on another, and another woman on another.”

Dezső implies that one woman leads to a pat on the back and now let’s all move on. “Once they had appointed one woman, the men seem to have said, ‘We have done our job.’”

Left of Power Center

The research also implies that the quota seems to not only to limit numbers of women, but their influence – because many companies satisfy the hidden quota by promoting a woman to a professional position, such as head of human resources, rather than (or to keep them out of) a line position. 47% of first-time CEOS came from a line position in the survey, whereas only 4% came from a professional position.

The researchers noted, “The strongest spillovers are associated with professional positions, which are generally more supporting, lower in status, and less integral to a firm’s operations than line officer or CEO positions. We argue that a firm’s managers have greater latitude to use professional positions to satisfy an implicit quota on women in top management.”

Lower Return on Gender Equality Investment?

The study found that efforts to promote women into executive roles after one woman was in place become lower or even in opposition. Getting the second women promoted into the top ranks is a far more challenging feat than the first.

Observing company dynamics, Ross told Business Insider that after one appointment, “They orient their efforts away from promoting women, perhaps to the point of resistance.”

The authors speculate that this could be down to “diminishing returns” for companies on the gender equality scoreboard. While companies gain legitimacy, media, and a representative “face” for change when one woman is hired into a top executive position – and even hold an advantage to peer companieswho have zero -the marginal “value” declines with additional hires, while the cost to the status quo becomes higher.

One woman is enough to stave off internal and external pressure for gender equality but not enough for real change. Stopping at hiring one woman into a top executive position is kind of like crossing the starting line, but then prematurely taking a break to rest securely upon your laurels.

No, It’s Not Queen Bee Syndrome

Maybe those queen bee women are keeping other women out, protecting their coveted positions of power by pushing other women down? No.

The researchers found that the lowest negative spillovers actually occurred in companies with a woman CEO – a female CEO went some way towards mitigating the implicit quota. If a woman CEO was in place, there was a greater chance of further female top executive presence.

Maybe it’s about time that we stop suspecting the lone woman on the ladder in the crowd of men as the one that’s rigging the rungs.

Protected Territory At the Top

Many studies have shown that women create a positive spill-over for each other, such as decreased discrimination and increased pay, at other management levels.

“However,” the researchers state, “we obtained qualitatively different results among top managers, perhaps because men’s willingness to work towards the betterment of women within their organizations is lower in top management, where each job is so valuable both to the individual who holds it and to the dominant male coalition inside the organization.”

At the top it would seem, male managers are protecting the most valuable turf.

We Must Disassociate “One” With Progress

Gender diversity isn’t about show. It’s about change and influence – and as long as changes are made to show gender diversity, they won’t really be made for gender diversity.

It’s well-documented that women in top management bring serious benefits to organizations. It’s well-documented that real progress happens when gender diversity goes beyond tokenism to meet a critical mass.

Whether a board member, an investor, or any champion for diversity within a company, Dezső advises that when you see one woman at the top, it’s best to “keep up the pressure or even apply more pressure” to avoid a plateau.

Today women in top executive positions remain an isolated and fragmented minority. One women among top executives is not a sign of real progress at a systemic level. She’s a sign of more work to be done, and if not recognized as such, a decoy for the changes that aren’t being made.

Real progress doesn’t have a face. It has so many that no one person becomes exemplary of it.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

Better Leadership: Managing and Leading Different Personalities in the Workplace

Better LeadershipMost of us have already been, or will at some point in our careers be, subject to at least one personality test. According to Bersin by Deloitte, the use of personality tests at work is on the rise. Tests are now used on 60%-70% of prospective workers in the US, compared to 30%-40% in 2009. By understanding personality types, organizations are able to better staff their teams by selecting the right mix of personality types that will best complement the organization’s culture and goals and make for better leadership.

Take the well-known and globally utilized Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) as an example. MBTI was developed by two housewives during World War II as a means to align women who were entering the workforce with jobs which suited their personalities. Its output: extroversion versus introversion, sensing versus intuition, thinking versus feeling, judgment versus perception. Understanding your personality traits as a result of such tests is useful, but perhaps more important is the ability to understand the personality types of others. How can you use the output of such tests (although sometimes questionable) to effectively shape the way you deal with your employers and colleagues?

Meet the five personality types…

The first step is to identify the personality types. It is debatable just how many personality types there are; some say 4 (four temperaments), others claim 9 (nine corporate personality types). Interestingly, psychologists will tell you that personality disorders such as narcissism show up in leaders more commonly than we would like to admit since these people with these tendencies have a strong desire for unlimited success, but are ignorant to the feelings of others.

Here we look at 5 (based on the Five Factor Model).

1. Bring it on (openness): These individuals are open to new experiences, curious, creative, and prove invaluable in organizations with a focus on innovation. The number of colleagues you come across with a consistent ‘bring it on’ attitude will be industry dependent, but they tend not to thrive in slow moving industries and those where creativity is stifled. Their “can do” approach is necessary in times of uncertainty, but their associated fearless approach to risk could make them difficult to rein in.

2. No – it’s not in the plan (conscientious): You will have come across these characters before; they bring structure to organizations and keep the house in order. Such individuals may be best utilized during organizational change or short term, high intensity projects. Discipline and preparation are their strongest assets; however they can be difficult to deal with when spontaneity is needed.

3. So “out there” (extrovert): This can be one of the easiest traits to spot. Extroverts are not afraid to share ideas and opinions, be assertive and generally put themselves “out there”. While great in situations where action is required, there is a risk that they drown out the opinions of their colleagues.

4. Yes, yes, yes (agreeable): These are the agreeable colleagues who sympathize and empathize with others, invest time in people, and are seen to be both trusting and trustworthy. While the quality of their relationships tends to be stronger than those of a disagreeable nature, their ability to lead can be put to the test during difficult times.

5. Rollercoaster (emotional stability): We know this type all too well. Individuals in this group tend to go through emotional rollercoasters, feeling negative emotions acutely. They tend to get easily worked up, irritated and upset in the workplace. While difficult to keep up with their frequent mood swings, their focus on negative aspects of tasks could potentially highlight gaps and areas of improvement which would otherwise have been missed.

How to how to deal with each personality at work

Once identified, being clear on how you approach different personality types is important.

1. Embrace, or at least acknowledge, the value in all personality types: While not always the same or complementary to your personality type, the most successful teams are made up of a mix of personalities. Gender also plays a part; according to a 2001 study, most women reported themselves to be higher in the rollercoaster, “yes, yes, yes” and “bring it on” groups. Although the emotional stability trait in extremes may not be desirable, the benefits of working with an agreeable and creative colleague should not be discounted. A balanced team is important.

2. Get the right person assigned to the task: Asking a conscientious individual to lead in a volatile environment is not setting the individual or the team up for success. Use the strengths of each individual by allocating the right job where she or he can excel.

3. Remember, there is a spectrum: While personality tests can enable you in trying to understand the personalities in your organizations, it is important to see them as a framework and the majority of individuals aren’t either agreeable or disagreeable, but rather somewhere in between and dependent on the situation. The approach you choose to take with individual should align with their personality.

The most unconstructive thing to do would be for you to avoid certain personality types completely. Each person brings something to the table, and disharmony in teams and organizations is experienced when individuals and leaders do not acknowledge this.

Leaders: recruiting and managing multi-personality teams

Based on his research, Dr. Robert Hogan of Hogan Assessments, has developed a set of tools to help leaders understand the personalities of those they employ and how the individuals approach problem solving and difficult situations. According to Hogan, organizations are increasingly seeing the value of such understanding: workplace personality testing has become a $500m a year business and growing.

Nicki Gilmour, CEO of theglasshammer, who is also a qualified organizational psychologist and coach, comments about the use of tools for personal development at work,

“Personality tests are most useful when they are taken in context of the ‘coachee’s’ direct working culture since behaviour is a product of both personality and the environment that the person is surrounded by. It is so useful to know yourself and using tools like the Hogan suite, you can honestly see your potential triggers that can happen when any of us have our backs against the wall.”

The increasing diversity of our workforce demands that leaders understand how to recruit and manage multi-personality teams. Without understanding the personalities in your workforce, there is a limit to how successful any leader or manager can be.

By Nneka Orji

/by

What MORE Can I Say? Persuasion Tactics for the Workplace

,

businesswomen-meetingGuest Contribution by Dianna Booher

People resist being persuaded. They fast-forward through commercials. They say, “No, thank you; I’m just looking” when the sale associate asks if they need help to buy—even if two minutes later they ask for help.

The vast majority of people (88 percent) report that they break their New Year’s resolutions before the end of January. And those resolutions are changes that people themselves decide to make––to get physically fit, get out of debt, get organized.

Clearly, your clients and coworkers are wary of spin. So when you MUST break through that protective barrier to persuade someone to change their mind or behavior, you have to communicate with intention.

My book What MORE Can I Say? Why Communication Fails and What to Do About It outlines nine laws to move people to action. The law of “Specificity Versus Generalization” is foundational when it comes to persuasion.

Be Concrete

Your clients, your staff, and your peers consider random communication coming to them an intrusion. Daily messages on social media, network news, and email blasts by their very nature have to be generic. Result: People skim, scan, or tune out altogether.

Both of the following comments have one thing in common: They are used in multiple scenarios––with varied meanings.

“It’s our policy. That’s the best I can do.” In the midst of supplier negotiations, this ultimatum typically brings the situation to a halt––unless the other party really has no other options. And rarely is that the case.

“We will get back to you when we have a resolution to the problem.” When leaders toss this promise to a crowd during a crisis, they react, “We want to know now what you’re doing to find the resolution.”

Such statements anger people, cause them to dig in their heels, and stall action. For a more positive response, use concrete, straightforward language. Acknowledge specific issues or difficulties to be resolved. Explain specifically what you’re doing to investigate behind the scenes. State specific action steps you plan to take or that you want others to take.

Drop the Doublespeak

People distrust what they don’t understand. Much of what is written today in corporate America and by governmental agencies is not intended to inform people. It is written to protect the organization providing the information.

Take pharmaceutical studies for example. Strip the disclosures and doublespeak, and what they say is, “We are not sure how and why this new medicine works for some individuals. We don’t know what the implications and complications may be in the future. Take it at your own risk. We are not responsible for what may happen to you.” But if they made that statement so clearly and boldly, nobody would use the medicine without further testing.

Double-speak persists as a protective shield. But gobbledygook also limits your personal influence and power in a distinctive way: distrust.

Avoid Making the Effort Look Harder Than It Is

That’s not the same as making things look easy. Promise people that changing will be easy, and they will think you’re either a liar, incompetent, or crazy. When you’re trying to influence people to make a change, they need to consider a specific request and make the commitment. Otherwise, you’ll have a “yes” answer and a “no” on the follow-through.
But that said, some things really are easy. Why make them unnecessarily difficult simply by the way you communicate them?

Whether creating an image for your LinkedIn group, sending email, drafting a client proposal, or soliciting gifts from donors, break the action you want down into clear, doable steps. Provide the necessary details to take the action without the other person having to play detective and make unnecessary calls and send extra emails.
If it’s easy, say so. Pay attention to physical layout on the page or screen: Make things look easy:

  • Use a simple font.
  • Make subject lines useful, specific, concrete.
  • Provide informative headlines for easy scanning within a document.
  • Use lists where appropriate.
  • Emphasize details by using blank space, bolding, and color for later reference and recall.

Imagine how time-consuming and difficult the task of reading this blog would have seemed had there been no headings, no list, and only a few long paragraphs.

Persuading someone to change their mind or behavior in and of itself is difficult. To be influential, make your message relevant and your action specific.

Dianna Booher is the bestselling author of 46 books, published in 26 languages, with nearly 4 million copies sold. She works with organizational leaders to increase their effectiveness through clear communication and executive presence. He latest books include “What More Can I Say?: Why Communication Fails and What to Do About It”; “Creating Personal Presence: Look, Talk, Think, and Act Like a Leader”; and “Communicate with Confidence”. For more information, please visit www.booherresearch.com and www.whatmorecanisaythebook.com.

/by

Career Tip Of The Week

,
women salesHow much of your time should be spent managing others?

The answer to this question depends on how you are rewarded at your firm and in your role. Look back at your job description and see if what you are doing lines up with what you are supposed to be doing!

If you are tasked with an individual contributor role yet find yourself heavily involved with managing others so that you can do your job well, then it is worth examining the barriers that are stopping you from having a clear path at work to succeed. Are the barriers systemic and part of the culture of ‘how we do things around here?’

Welcome to Career Tip of the Week. In this column we aim to provide you with a useful snippet of advice to carry with you all week as you navigate the day to day path in your career.

By Nicki Gilmour, Executive Coach and Organizational Psychologist

Contact nicki@theglasshammer.com if you would like to hire an executive coach to help you navigate the path to optimal personal success at work.

/by

Voice of Experience: Corinne Martindale, Senior Vice President and Head of Product Management, Voya Investment Management

,

Corinne Martindale“If you had told me when I was in college that I would have a career in investment management, I would have said that you were crazy! I am a great example of how you sometimes have no idea where the road may take you, but if you allow yourself to be open to new opportunities, you will end up in exciting places and in roles that you never imagined.”

That is how CorinneMartindale describes her career journey. As an English and Political Science major in college, she had dreams of becoming an editor or writer. After graduation, Martindale worked at a public relations agency and then accepted a position at GE Asset Management, which completely changed the course of her career: she learned about the asset management business through various trade support specialist roles and subsequently worked her way up to a client portfolio management position. When an opportunity to be considered for the role of institutional product manager at Voya Investment Management was presented, she saw it as an exciting way to apply the skills that she had learned at GE while immersing herself in a new company. After serving as a product manager, Martindale eventually became head of product management in 2011.

“I have been fortunate enough to work at companies such as GE and Voya, where if you demonstrate that you are a dedicated, hard-working and fast-learning individual, your previous background doesn’t necessarily limit you – they look for certain skills and traits in employees and then assist in developing your additional industry aptitude.”

Along the way, she decided that to successfully continue on her chosen trajectory, she needed to develop additional business acumen and completed the Executive MBA Program at NYU Stern. “It was one of the best decisions I have ever made,” Martindale said. “Those were two of the most challenging years of my life in terms of trying to balance work, life and school, but it provided me not only with the additional skills and tools that I needed to strengthen my expertise and capabilities as a business leader, but it also gave me a new network of professors and fellow students who inspired and challenged me.”

Even though her current position wouldn’t seem to reflect her initial career goals and love of writing and editing, she has found that having those related communication skills are critical and applicable to every role and have greatly benefited her in the asset management industry.

Risks Pay Off

As she looks over her career, Martindale has had a number of professional moments that have left an inedible impact. After only a few years in asset management at GE, she applied for a role that was typically held by individuals with more years of experience. The hiring manager thought she was too young and wanted to dismiss her as a candidate for those with more experience. However, another senior leader who knew Martindale’s work supported her advancement and relayed that she just needed to be given the chance – that she was the type of individual who would put in the hours and effort to overcome the learning curve that this new job might bring.

“I told the hiring manager that I would not let him down and if given the opportunity, I would promise to be a hire that he never regretted,” Martindale recalls, adding that it took all the strength she had not to let self-doubt cripple her as she continued the interview process. She eventually was offered the ‘stretch assignment’ and went above and beyond to overcome the initial perceptions placed on her to achieve success in the position. Though there were times she felt frustrated that she wasn’t immediately viewed in the firm as an expert, she will never forget the note she received from the hiring manager when she decided to leave the firm. He told her she had proved him wrong and that she was one of the strongest hires he had made.

Personal and Team Achievements

From that experience, Martindale learned that sometimes the toughest jobs or circumstances where others may doubt your capabilities are the best opportunities to test your own boundaries and rise to the challenge. “You won’t learn and grow as a business leader if you always follow the ‘safe’ route and only take on projects or jobs where you are already an expert. “

“I also learned how powerful it is to build your own personal ‘brand’ via the work that you produce in your current role and the importance of creating relationships with other leaders within your organization. There are good odds that one day another leader may need to ‘go to bat’ for you or help you advance to a new level. Having proven yourself to these leaders and having established trusting relationships outside your own team will help you in many ways.”

Another achievement Martindale cited was creating and building her current team at Voya. Moving from an individual contributor role to managing a team that initially included peers as well as colleagues with more experience was new ground for her. Martindale realized immediately that there aren’t many resources (or much time) available for training an individual to manage others, even though it offers new challenges and situations.

She has found that helping her team advance in their own careers is one of the most satisfying and meaningful jobs you can have, as you learn from them and see them shine in the accomplishments they deliver to the firm. “It is so important to hire the right people and support the teams that work with you – and for you – because no one can be successful completely on their own.”

Take a Risk for Greater Return

Looking back, Martindale believes it’s ok to not always know what your next title or job will be – that although you should always set goals and milestones for yourself, they can change or veer off course. “For so many years, I knew exactly what I thought I wanted to be and how I was going to get there and when my vision changed, it shook me a little. I have always been a planner when it comes to my professional life but I have learned that there isn’t necessarily one path that you will lead you to the next step in your career.”

For that reason, she advises young women to take a chance on an opportunity that might initially seem terrifying. “Every project, experience or job that scared me or made me nervous turned out to be the best move for me,” she says. “I wasn’t always successful at first but I always learned from those experiences and they propelled me forward and gave me the opportunity to embrace the next challenge ahead.”

Networking for Success

Martindale hasparticipated as a mentor and mentee in the mentoring program at Voya and has found it to be very helpful as a forum to not only learn and grow from the advice and guidance from female peers and leaders but also from male counterparts. However, she finds that much of her valuable insight has also come from the more informal mentoring relationships she has developed over time.

She stresses that you cannot underestimate the power of networking – both internally and externally with professionals within and outside of your own industry. “I have uncovered so many new ideas or new processes from those in other industries that I can apply to my own roles.”

She says that networking can often be one of the first things we sacrifice in our daily routines because it’s difficult to find the time and can often put you outside your comfort zone if you aren’t a social person. But as you progress in your career, having a network of professional colleagues inside and outside of your own firm is vital to being able to advance.

“Every person has a different and unique story about how they got to where they are in their career and I have found that many leaders are usually very willing to share their personal and career experiences. You can gain great insight and advice by listening to the lessons learned by others.”

By Cathie Ericson

/by

Why Women Can’t Stand Alone as Gender Diversity Champions

,

female leaderIt’s not just because women hold less formal power at the top (only 5% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women and 1% in finance) that they can’t shoulder gender diversity alone. Even when they arrive at executive level, disadvantages in informal power and legitimacy are at odds against women’s efficacy in gender championship.

According to qualitative research on champions of gender equality by Jennifer Anne de Vries, University of Melbourne, one thing remains unavoidable: “Executive level champions are part of the organizational gendering processes they seek to change.”

De Vries’ qualitative research on gender diversity champions in a university and a police force highlights that the champion role is intertwined with sex, gender, and (gendered) power, all at play within a (gendered) organization. Women are inherently disadvantaged as champions of gender diversity in a male-dominated culture. Even at equal rank, a male and female executive stand on a “very different launching pad for their champion behavior.”

Consider this conundrum: Is it possible that when it comes to leading corporate change initiatives correlated with strong business advantages, anything a male leader can do a female leader could do too – except lead the game change on gender diversity?

Women are Outsiders to the Culture, Insiders to the Cause

A woman that holds a position of senior power in a highly male-dominated management culture becomes a symbol of gender diversity by default. Her journey was likely different to her male counterparts. She holds the potential (and pressure) to be a role model as a woman leader within the organization.

But in the champion role (which she’s likely expected to take up), that same dynamic of being an outsider in a male-dominated management culture, but perceived as an insider to gender-equality, spells out lower informal power and lower legitimacy.

De Vries found that senior male executives expressed women can be accused of “self-serving” when championing gender diversity – “looking after the sisterhood – women looking after women.”

And research out of the University of Colorado studying 362 senior executives demonstrated that diversity efforts on behalf of women (and minority) leaders can be negatively viewed as self-serving their own social group. “Nonwhite and women leaders who engage in diversity-increasing behaviors in the highest organizational ranks are systematically penalized with lower performance ratings for doing so,” the researchers wrote.

Specifically, women, held to higher standards of warmth than men, who engage in diversity-increasing behavior “will tend to be viewed as less warm and receive lower performance ratings than their equally diversity-valuing male leader counterparts.”

In fact, diversity-valuing behavior negatively impacted evaluations only for female and minority leaders – “leaders who are thought to have the greatest potential to dismantle the glass ceiling.”

Co-author Hekman noted, “executives who are women or ethnic minorities are penalized every day for doing what everyone says they ought to be doing – helping other members of their groups fulfill their management potential. It is a revealing sign that the supposed death of longstanding biases has been greatly exaggerated.”

In regards to informal power, De Vries research also noted that women in highly masculine contexts may also not have the same security in relationships at a senior level, are likely under more scrutiny in “proving” themselves as a leader (highly engaged in “gender work” of their own), and may not be taken seriously when they “position gender equity as a strategic issue.”

In other words, while their leadership challenges the status quo, senior executive women may not be as well positioned to overtly drive a mindset change among men in the organization.

Men are Insiders to the Culture, Outsiders to the Cause

Men are in the opposite position. Being an insider to the male-dominated management culture but perceived as an outsider to the gender-equality cause, gives male champions more informal power and more legitimacy.

De Vries notes, “Men’s power to challenge the status quo derives from their membership of, and acceptance within, the male establishment.”

Men in a senior executive role don’t have to do “gender work” as leaders (they represent the default stereotype in their environment), likely have more secure relationships as part of the insider club, and are more legitimate in championing gender diversity as a strategic issue because there’s no perceived component of self-interest – although they can actually benefit from it.

The University of Colorado researchers found that when it came to senior white male executives, “valuing diversity gave a significant boost to ratings for warmth and performance” by their bosses. De Vries also found that it led to strong appreciation within the company. And Bainhas found that (mostly male) CEO led gender diversity-increasing action and behaviors converts more employees to company “promoters”.

Indeed, not all male champions are equally effective. De Vries found a male champion is powerful when he’s perceived as really choosing to practice and visibly and consistently embody the role through his actions, not just preach. And resistant, low visibility CEO male championing can actually be ultimately damaging.

Another gender advantage is that a top executive male perceived as having chosen to personally own the gender equality initiative can give it a sense of importance, gravitas, and credibility. Whereas with a female executive, expectations seem to diminish the bonus points in credibility.

Championship – Can We Get More Men to Step Up?

There may be no escaping what De Vries calls a “clearly gendered nature of leadership when championing a gender cause.”

Despite the strong business case for gender equality as a corporate initiative, senior women are too often expected to carry the torch on gender diversity (often predominantly), marginalizing the issue and absolving senior men from being highly involved despite the importance of their power and agency.

We need more men actively onboard at the top senior levels genuinely daring to challenge the system that has benefited them. Should women leaders bow out and just let men take the reins? No. Men and women have the potential to complement each other in bringing change forward. Gender equity requires bravery and business sense on behalf of both men and women in senior executive roles.

Maybe it’s time we saw that there’s more than one way for a woman to be a role model for gender diversity. And equally, it’s about time we saw more top male leaders displaying bravery, rather than delegating it to women, when it comes to leading the charge on making gender diversity change a corporate priority.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

Men Who Get It: Roger Mitchell, Managing Director, TIAA-CREF, IT Business and Resource Management

,

Roger Mitchell“Increasing diversity is not the responsibility of women or the minority group alone,” says Roger Mitchell. “What is often overlooked is that everybody benefits from diversity, because there is a clear impact on the bottom line, and strong correlation to increased performance, engagement and innovation.”

On his journey to becoming a strong champion of diversity, Mitchell began his career in the UK with Ford Motor Company in a series of human resources roles.Ford eventually offered him the opportunity to move to Detroit, where he lived for 15 years. After a stint as head of HR for Ford’s global IT group, Mitchell segued into a position leading the global IT strategy team. He later joined Fidelity as a member of the HR leadership team. Mitchell subsequently came to TIAA-CREF as the managing director of IT business and resource management, and as a member of the IT leadership team.

Throughout his career, Mitchell has identified the need to expand roles for women as a business imperative. “In IT specifically there’s already a shortage of talent, and it’s tightening even more,” he says. “There’s a necessity to attract and retain both talented women and men, because we are under a tremendous amount of pressure for those skills.”

The Light Bulb Moment

Mitchell first became a diversity champion during his time at Ford when he ended up in a significant disagreement with his boss over missing a meeting to take his kids to the doctor. “When he asked me why my wife couldn’t do it, I had to explain that she worked too, and she had an important meeting at that time and couldn’t miss it,” Mitchell recounts, adding that was when he realized that everyone benefits from flexibility.

He recalls that earlier in his career it was expected that men would put in unlimited numbers of hours as the breadwinner, and he found there were times he didn’t get to spend the time he wanted to with his own family.

Part of changing this traditional mindset is challenging premises such as “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus,” as espoused by John Gray in his best-selling book.

“I don’t believe that our differences are so extreme, that we might as well be from different planets. I frame it more as men are from earth, and women are from earth too.”

While he agrees that there may be some differences in communication styles, he points out that there are differences even among people of the same gender or across different cultures. “I find it more productive to spend my time focusing on similarities between men and women and any other groups,” he said emphasizing how focusing on differences is divisive and can be the catalyst for unconscious bias.

Identifying and Managing Unconscious Bias

Mitchell is sensitive to unconscious bias, and one example he has seen is how women are judged more on performance than on their potential. He also finds that they are remembered for their mistakes more than their achievements, and that they continually walk a tightrope between being too masculine or too feminine.

“You are either not liked or not respected when you get on the wrong side of the tightrope,” he says.

In Mitchell’s view, systemic change is what will count. He sees his role as impacting those systems to advocate for diversity and inclusion — whether that’s in the areas of employee development or compensation.

“Early in my career we would look at numbers and targets and make symbolic appointments but if they were the wrong appointments, that would set everything back,” he said.

One systemic change he is working on is reviewing job descriptions to check for unconscious bias. He has found implied hours of work or exaggerated amounts of travel that might deter women when in fact they might not really be necessary. To help solve the problem, he says he asks his team to really think about whether the targets they are offering are typical or an extreme example.

Other areas ripe for diversity opportunities are talent review meetings where high potential females are identified. Mitchell says he has challenged his peers in those meetings to validate their selections and compare them to the female candidates.

“We have to look at all of our processes and make sure that there are no unconscious biases,” Mitchell said. “My role as an advocate is to remind people to make sure we’re not missing those who might not be getting the attention and exposure they deserve.”

He also knows that you have to interrupt unconscious bias as it is happening – maybe when you notice that someone is not being heard in a meeting, try to stop the flow of conversation and help them get the floor to make their point.

Spending Political Capital Wisely

Throughout his career, Mitchell has often acted as a sponsor, and in doing so realized that it requires him to use some of his own political capital. He also appreciates that his own sponsors, who value his judgment, help him lobby for those whom he is sponsoring. “It is crucial to focus on talent and use your political capital wisely or you lose the trust of your peers and your own sponsors.” He tries to maximize female opportunities by looking for talented women and putting them on key projects that allow them to exhibit their best capabilities. He also says that as a strong advocate for expanding talent, he tries to hire people who are better than himself and to not feel threatened but to see this as an opportunity to challenge himself. A crucial part of identifying and developing top talent is providing them support and placing them in challenging stretch assignments.

“It is crucial to focus on talent and use your political capital wisely or you lose the trust of your peers and your own sponsors.”

Mitchell admits that his blind spot earlier in his career was to pick people who were just like him, assuming that if he was successful and chose people close to his profile, that they would be too.

“I know now that is flawed logic, and that you need employees with different perspectives and backgrounds,” he says. “I learned that hiring those in my own image wasn’t giving me as successful a team as I could have had. You need spirited conversation and push back to arrive at the right viewpoint.”

Advice for Leaders

Mitchell says that having two daughters of his own in the workforce gives him a unique perspective since he’s heard their stories. He advises others to listen to the experiences of female colleagues and never assume you understand how they feel.

“When you’re speaking, all you’re doing is repeating what you already know. When you’re listening, you’re potentially learning something new.”

He also believes that women have a role to play – notably by making sure that they state their needs rather than letting someone make an assumption. For example, a woman back from maternity leave or one with a young family needs to tell her boss if she’s willing to travel. If she has a partner who will follow and therefore is mobile, say so. People will make assumptions based on stereotypes so you have tell them what you are thinking.

And that includes being specific about career aspirations. He finds that women tend to be more modest and talk about growth and development, whereas men are more likely to be specific and state that they want to be CTO in three years.

A key component to success will be establishing a strong network which is how you create connections that may lead to opportunities, whether it’s volunteering to be engaged in high-priority projects or finding an empathetic sponsor.

“With men still holding many of the senior corporate roles, we must make sure that they in turn become sponsors for women, and help move them into senior roles, “says Mitchell.He views his role in mobilizing other men behind this cause as crucial to the success of any firm’s diversity and inclusion effort.

By Cathie Ericson

/by

OP ED: Men should be Gender Champions, so I started with myself.

,

John KeyserHow can it be 2015, and yet brilliant and talented women are still stuck in the pipeline? The “glass ceiling,” coined way back in 1979, is still impenetrable for many women. To a senior businessman like me, this is misguided and unacceptable.

So I recently published a book to do something about it. Make Way For Women: Men and Women Leading Together Improve Culture and Profits documents the overwhelming evidence that companies led by women and men together are more profitable and sustainable. Also in the book are clear strategies for making this culture change happen across industries.

A little background.I have held high-level executive positions in the corporate and not-for-profit worlds for 40 years. During this time I have worked with many highly effective leaders, many of whom are women.These women inspired others with their business smarts and their people skills, and that is leadership.

Yet, while a few of these highly skilled women made it senior leadership positions, way too many were limited by that damned glass ceiling. And yet men at the top would never admit that. Why? In my mind, it’s because men tend to make assumptions about women. “Yes, she’s very capable, but her family responsibilities will prevent her from traveling as necessary, or as a woman, she can’t handle our largest and most difficult clients.”

I hear these assumptions by men over and over again, unfounded assumptions, and I know that often these decisions are made without discussion with the women in question. These women are not even asked if they are in a position to take on stretch opportunities!

All too often, a man who is less qualified and has not earned the promotion or assignment will be given the job.

In my opinion, capable women and men leading together strengthen a company’s leadership at a time when highly effective leadership is needed.

(subtitle) Creating equal leadership opportunities for both genders?

In my experience, women need advocates in the C-Suites to create pathways to leadership. For example, a very accomplished woman I work with in my coaching practice wanted to continue to advance within her company. The next step would be a seat on the management committee, all male.

She was given the opportunity to join the committee, and she was certainly nervous. Her strategy was to listen intently, be ready to handle negativity and criticism toward her with grace and then to thoughtfully offer her ideas. To come out from behind herself, to believe in herself and her voice.

So she spoke up and sure enough, there were men who shot down her ideas, yet she learned to roll with it, to keep speaking up until she got comfortable with how it worked. And that persistence is how she broke through the glass ceiling to become one of the very top executives in the company, a true leader.

With the help of my friend and a writer, Adrienne Hand, we undertook the mission of the book Make Way for Women.

The first part of the book identifies research studies that validates that companies with gender diverse leadership outperform companies that do not have as many women in key senior positions.

I also share my own views and experience, and those of 45 successful men and women we interviewed including Nicki Gilmour, the Founder and CEO of theglasshammer.com. We selected these men and women as they are highly respected in their fields. The men we spoke with understand the value women bring, and the women are highly accomplished and skilled leaders who are succeeding in male-dominated environments.

I hope the book is good as the messages are, I believe, very important!

Now is the time to be forward thinking leaders, be out in front of the change that is coming, and help it happen! I started with myself.

By John Keyser

/by

What’s keeping white male leaders from leading Diversity & Inclusion efforts?

,
Nervous Business WomanDo you hear what I hear? The call for men, and particularly white men, to join in on gender equality and diversity efforts is not only echoing loudly, it’s piling up into a chorus.

White male leaders are being not only invited, but implored to join the case for diversity and inclusion. The predominant argument is not just that diversity advocates want white male leaders to join in, it’s that the success of diversity efforts could be greatly enhanced by their participation due to their continued formal and informal positions of power and authority within companies.

With men holding over 82% of board positions in Fortune 1000 companies, and a significant number of those men being white, their participation in Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) efforts has been proposed as “Creating a New Normal” in the Huffington Post.

So with the invitation in their hands, what keeps white male leaders holding back on their RSVP to diversity and inclusion?

With all of our editorial focus on engaging white men, we thought it useful to take a step back and remind ourselves of the barriers we must navigate in doing so.

Challenges to Engaging White Men

As Chuck Shelton, Chief Executive Officer at Greatheart Leader Labs and moderator of the recent event that theglasshammer.com held on the topic has said, “No business strategy, including D&I, will deliver optimal results when many with position power (white men, in this discussion) disconnect from the strategy.”

The landmark study to date on engaging white men in diversity & inclusion efforts remains his organization’s “White Men’s Leadership Study” which pointed out that white men are less likely to be engaged in diversity and inclusion initiatives at companies.

White male leaders hold both the purse strings when it comes to D&I programs and the social influence necessary to make these programs work. Authors Shelton and Thomas noted that white men are “a significantly underperforming asset in every company’s global D&I investment portfolio.”
The report identified many dynamics into why while male leaders remain both an underperforming – and perhaps undervalued – asset in the movement for diversity and inclusion.

Feeling Excluded

You can’t RSVP to a party you don’t feel invited to. Just a couple years ago, the biggest factor revealed in the study was that white men did not feel included in Diversity & Inclusion. Nearly 70% of white male respondents agreed with the statement, “It is still not clear diversity initiatives are meant to include white men.” 60% of women and minority leaders agreed, too.

This was not limited to a perception among white male leaders. Women and minority leaders didn’t necessarily see the value of including white men in inclusion and diversity programs. “Leaders who are not white and male may quietly doubt that white male inclusion will open doors for them,” the WLMS report said. But when Diversity & Inclusion efforts don’t actively engage white men, they are prone to exclude them.

When women and minority leaders shoulder D&I initiatives, and those initiatives are not seen as owned by all and in everybody’s interest, it creates counter-dynamics. A study published by the Academy of Management illustrated that diversity-efforts on the behalf of women and minorities can be negatively viewed as scheming and (social group) self-serving. The researchers reported, “Ethnic minority or female leaders who engage in diversity-valuing behavior are penalized with worse performance ratings than their equally diversity-valuing white or male counterparts,” which only reinforces the glass ceiling. The research also points out the paradox that for white men “valuing diversity gave a significant boost to ratings for warmth and performance.”

The authors of Gender in Organizations: Are Men Allies or Adversaries to Women’s Career Advancement write, “By excluding men from the focus and development of strategies to attentuate gender disparities, businesses are missing an opportunity to effect change.”

Being protective about diversity and inclusion doesn’t ultimately advance its interests, and engaging white men – who might not feel invited by default – cannot be a passive exercise. It must be an active effort.

Being Skeptical

Another of the biggest challenges identified was skepticism on behalf of white men on the value of diversity and inclusion programs, as well as the suspicion that some people may receive jobs or promotions that they are unqualified for through these programs. The WMLS researchers explained, “Progress is stifled by the perceived tension between the qualifications of diverse employees and the organizational commitment to diversity.”

Another form skepticism took was deflection of relevance. Some white, male respondents seemed irritated to be part of a study on race and gender, and responded with what the report authors called “deflective comments”, such as asserting the questions were unfair or that race and gender doesn’t matter these days. Shelton and Thomas wrote, “We need to recognize deflections, and respond to such viewpoints through honest, straightforward dialogue.”

While prejudice is something you can put your finger on, unconscious bias often is not. Becoming aware of the unconscious bias in each of us, and how it’s at play in the workplace, for example through stereotype threat, helps to reaffirm the importance of D&I efforts.

Also male leaders who are trailblazing in diversity and inclusion have repeatedly advised that to engage men in leadership positions with the value of D&I programs, focus on measurable results (and measuring results) of diversity efforts such as impact on the bottom line and driving innovation in the workplace.

Having Perception & Communication Gaps

A third major factor in struggling to engage white male leaders was that they already perceived themselves to be effective at diversity and inclusion…way more than their peers did.

White men were twice (45%) as likely as women and minorities (21%) to view white male leaders as effective in the areas of diversity and inclusion. The perception gap extended to white men’s effectiveness at coaching and improving the performance of diverse employees (33 points gap); building strong, diverse teams (36 points); promoting diverse talent on merit (36 points); and including diverse voices in decision making (40 points.)

While perception is subjective, statistics showing underrepresentation of diversity are not. The authors suggested that with such a disparity in perception around effectiveness, conversation requires “care and focus,” in which some conflict is to be naturally expected and handled.

“Candor among peers and co-workers is a very important element to this whole process,” said Shelton. “Real diversity and inclusion requires care and ensuring everyone feels that they are part of the effort, including white male leaders.” They noted, “Findings in this research build the case for conversations of care and candor, as we seek to engage and equip white men to integrate diversity and inclusion more effectively into their leadership work.”

Invitation & Opportunity

With the invitation to men being extended on more fronts, as far as the United Nations, perhaps exclusion is becoming less of a barrier for engaging men – perhaps now, the invitation is clear.

Speaking recently with Shelton, he shared, “We’re seeing a lot of organizations in which male leaders are up for ally development. The real measure will be when more men are actually active and accountable as allies and sponsors.”

Equally important is how we co-host the party with men. When we sit together at the table of diversity, we’ll be more likely to evoke change if all parties feel involved and invested in the process, the potential, and the outcome.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

Gender Champion: William “Bill” Johnson, CEO, Citi Retail Services

,

Bill JohnsonLeaders must always be conscious of the shadow they cast for their teams, says Bill Johnson, CEO of Citi Retail Services. “You can ‘talk the talk, but people watch you and your behavior, and what you do day in and day out is far more important than what you say. You should never ask anyone to do anything you wouldn’t do yourself, and you certainly should not behave in ways you wouldn’t want your team to emulate. The impression you leave behind is your shadow.”

For Johnson, that shadow extends to a deep passion for diversity. He credits this focus to two strong female role models that he had in his mother and grandmother, who both overcame adversity in their lives to become successful beyond what their education and opportunities would have normally allowed. He was always very aware of the decisions they made and the activities they pursued to advance themselves, and how those decisions helped them overcome some of the bias they faced in life. “Seeing what those two strong women accomplished helped give me better perspective on how to guide talent, irrespective of gender, to achieve their potential,” he says.

Carving Out His Path

Bill Johnson joined Citi in 1999 and has held a number of roles in the North America cards business over the years. Currently he serves as CEO of Citi Retail Services, a leading provider of private label credit cards to a virtual “who’s who” of retailers: major chains like The Home Depot, Best Buy, Macy’s and Sears; prominent specialty retailers like Staples, Brooks Brothers and The Children’s Place; large gas companies like Shell and ExxonMobil; and leaders in the automotive space, including Goodyear, Ford, Lincoln and Volkswagen U.S. In addition to private label and co-brand cards, Citi Retail Services specializes in research, data and analytics to help retailers grow sales through enhanced customer marketing, loyalty and compelling value propositions.

Prior to joining Citi, he spent 10 years at GE Capital, where he learned the retail card industry along with skills that have served him well in business development, relationship management and operational discipline.

A Diverse Team Starts at the Top

Johnson says his goal is to make sure thatevery person on the team has the right opportunities to succeed and that those who are smart, hardworking and committed to the business get exposure to the company’s leaders and retail partners. “I see this as doing the right thing for our business and our people. I look at our team and see diversity, which I’m proud of, but I’m more proud of the performance of the team,” he said.

To continue to build the team’s diversity, it’s important to him to ensure that a diverse slate of candidates is available. He believes it’s important that those in the organization who are doing the hiring expand where they look and source a diverse slate to encourage a range of perspectives and experiences that provide fresh ideas and expertise.
Twice a year, the business conducts rigorous talent reviews, and Johnson requires the entire leadership team to participate so that each member is familiar with the broader talent base as well as emerging talent deeper in the organization.

And that commitment to diversity manifests itself in his core leadership team:four of his six direct reports are women as well as two of his matrix reports. He has either hired or promoted each of these women, who lead major roles in partner management, marketing, risk, strategic initiatives, human resources and compliance.The next level of management is approximately one-third women, and they are always working to continue to grow that number.

Presenting Choices to Promote Sound Decisions

Over the last 30 years Johnson has mentored and sponsored a number of women, sharing his perspective on how to be successful in an environment that isn’t typically gender-diverse.

He finds it most valuable to help emerging talent – women in particular – think about the future and understand how the choices they make might be different from the choices others make. “It is important for anyone to understand that their career choices may be impacted by their personal choices. People – women and men – have to do what is right for them, personally and for their family. Making a choice isn’t a bad thing; it’s just part of life.”

He believes that his role as a sponsor isn’t about helping someone make those choices, but rather to help the individual give full consideration to all the aspects that go into making the decision and considering all the possible outcomes. By ensuring they consider all the consequences of their decisions, they not only can make the best choice for themselves, but they are also owning the choice themselves. “If you make a decision for someone, it gives them the liberty of not taking ownership for the outcome which is where regret and blame originate.”

Balancing the Team

Johnson recounts a story of a young woman who worked for him as a sales representative many years ago, when the industry was dominated by male clients. One particular client team was very traditional and was uncomfortable having a woman in the room. While it would have been easier to remove her from the account, Johnson believed she was a fantastic salesperson with potential to advance and was aware of the impact a reassignment could have on her career. Instead, they worked together to improve her executive presence. In future meetings, she was better able to contribute and ended up being very successful.

Johnson has carried that ethos during his work in Retail Services, where they believe in making the best decisions in the interest of the business while balancing the needs of the teams and their partners. They look for people who are curious and agile and who act with integrity but also realize that ensuring someone is a cultural fit is just as important as having the right skill set. “Given two candidates with similar skills, we gravitate every time toward the candidate who embodies our principles and values,” he said. “Over time, we’re more concerned with people who will do the right thing personally and make sure that others do the right thing. You have to hire the right people for the right reasons.

Johnson has a sign in his office with a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson that reads, “This time, like all times, is a very good one, if we but know what to do with it.”
He believes that can be extended to apply to people as well – that it’s easier to succeed with a positive attitude, and that it’s critical to always try to find the best in people by assuming their thoughts and actions are intended positively. “With that comes the understanding that men and women may be different, yet both are equal.”

By Cathie Ericson

/by