Women Leaders – Walking Out or Walking Onwards?

,

For every woman at the director level that was promoted to the next level in 2021, two women directors walked out the door of their company. Women leaders are now demanding more, and leaving their companies at unprecedented rates, according to The Women in The Workplace 2022 report by LeanIn.Org and McKinsey & Company, who have released the research annually since 2015.

“We’re finally seeing the moment where women in leadership are voting with their feet,” said Alexis Krivkovich, a managing partner at McKinsey and cofounding report author.

In this “profound change,” women are indeed deciding to vote for the workplace they want with the most compelling power they will ever have: their presence, time and energy. Nothing short of this will shake up the workplace as we have known it. No matter the current representation, senior women are going beyond just getting access to upper levels and getting clearer on what they would like to experience and see happen there, and seeking that out. Could senior women’s participation from this place of self-empowerment catalyze greater change?

Women Aren’t Leaving, They’re Leaving For Better

“We are in the midst of a Great Breakup in corporate America. Women leaders are leaving their companies at the highest rate we’ve ever seen. They aren’t leaving the workforce entirely but are choosing to leave for companies with better career opportunities, flexibility, and a real commitment to DEI,” said Sheryl Sandberg, founder of Lean In, who leaned out of Facebook this past summer.

About 10.5% of female leaders (senior management and above) left their companies in 2021, compared to 9% of male leaders. On the average year, the spread is close with only a half-point gap.

Senior women leaders, after all the journey they have gained, aren’t walking out because they don’t think they have choices. They are walking about because they finally know they do – and they are taking their leadership assets with them in search of better opportunities. Having now recovered from pandemic job losses, women are more attuned to the relationship they want (and the ones will not tolerate) within the workplace. Women’s threshold to tolerate toxicity and inequity has been thinned, yet the broken rung is still there and the broken record of unequal outcomes plays wearingly on repeat. Women leaders are voting for the relationships they want to have with work.

Cultures That Work for Women’s Advancement

Women are as ambitious as men. Black women leaders (59%) and women of color (41%) are even more likely to want to be top executives (27%). But only 1 in 4 C-Suite leaders is a woman and only one in 20 is a woman of color. For every 100 men promoted from entry level to manager, just 87 women and 82 women of color are promoted.

And the signals that counter advancement come across in microaggressions or more overt dynamics: Female leaders are twice as likely as male counterparts to be mistaken for someone junior. 37% of women leaders said they’ve had a co-worker get credit for their idea, compared to 27% of men. Black female leaders are 1.5x more likely than women overall to have had their judgment or qualification questioned. Many women still feel undermined or passed over in the workplace.

Recognition for and Performance Consideration Of Essential Work 

While women are twice as likely to do be doing DEI-related and inclusion work that is helping with company performance, they are disproportionally carrying an increasingly ‘valued’ aspect of leadership that too often goes unrecognized and 40% say does not factor into the performance review. Meanwhile, women leaders are more burnt out (43%) than male counterparts (31%).

Flexible Work Cultures that Embody the Talk Around Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

Women want a better work culture. Only 1 in 10 women wants to work on-site most of the time, and women will move for flexibility. It’s not surprising considering that 52% of senior female leaders do most of the family housework and childcare compared to 13% of senior male leaders. Women who work the way they want to feel far happier, feel they have more equal opportunity to advance and are less likely to leave their job. Remote work also provides a reprieve from office-based exclusion and as McKinsey points out, that is a fundamental issue for organizations to address: “Companies cannot rely on remote and hybrid work as a solution; they need to invest in creating a truly inclusive culture.”

Over the past two years, being in a culture committed to well-being and DEI has become more important to women, and they are 1.5 more likely to have left a job because they wanted a more inclusive culture.

Better And More Supportive Managers 

Having a supportive manager is a top three criteria for women when thinking of joining or staying with an organization. Only about half of women say their manager encourages respectful behavior on their team regularly. Less than half say their manager shows interest in their career and helps them manage their workload. Black women and Latinas are particularly less likely to feel their manager shows interest in their career, checks in on their well-being or promotes inclusion on the team. They also experience less psychological safety. Women with various intersectional identities see gaps between the lip service to inclusion and what is actually happening in their experience.

Towards A Work Paradigm That Works For Women?

Female directors are becoming more sensitive to the conditions that don’t work for them, and it matters for them and future generations. Women under 30 are highly ambitious to become senior leaders, but 2/3 would be more interested if they saw senior women with a covetable work-life balance, an increasingly important career requirement for younger people.

The press isn’t focused on how bad this attrition of women leaders is for women. It’s focused on how bad the attrition of women leaders is for organizations. McKinsey has previously found that executives teams in the top quartile of gender diversity have a 25% greater likelihood of outperformance (above average profitability) than those in the bottom. LeanIn.Org and McKinsey have several recommendations for organizations following this recent report.

Stepping back, we are interested in what happens when women leaders take stock of their own value. All along, women have been trying to pave the way for those behind them by fighting to have a seat at the table. But increasingly, women are realizing that modeling leadership is not only about the rooms you are able to walk into, but also the rooms you are willing to walk away from. Because we need to walk towards creating organizational missions and cultures where all women (and people) are welcome and supported to lead and live their lives.

That is the power of esteeming the self. How would that mindset shift, at a collective level, give rise to more change in our workplace?

By Aimee Hansen

/by

Do You Have an Intrapreneurial Mindset?

,

intrapreneurThere is no lack of entrepreneurial spirit among women. Women began 49% of new businesses in the U.S. in 2021 (up from 28% in 2019). Women entrepreneurs grew by 48% year-over-year, outpacing men in the entrepreneurial space by 22%. But how are women tracking in intrapreneurship?

According to Wikipedia, intrapreneurship “is the act of behaving like an entrepreneur while working within a large organization. Intrapreneurship is known as the practice of a corporate management style that integrates risk-taking and innovation approaches, as well as the reward and motivational techniques, that are more traditionally thought of as being the province of entrepreneurship.”

Psychology Today says that “teaching employees to become mindful intrapreneurs is the way to future-proof an organization.”

Intrapreneurial Assignments

According to Investopedia, intrapreneurship happens when an employee is “tasked” with the initiative of developing an innovative idea or project inside an organization – and given the freedom and autonomy to explore it. Although unlike entrepreneurs, an intrapreneur has access to the resources of an established company and doesn’t face the same level of outsized risks or outsized rewards. And yet, the intrapreneur does put skin in the game.

In one way or another, the intrapreneur is leading the charge on developing something that hasn’t been done in the organization before – whether a new section, a new department, a new product – or perhaps even a new approach or new team. Intrapreneurship has an internal start-up feel. Also, the Post-It Note, Gmail and Facebook like button are all arguably products of intrapreneurial thinking.

Just as formal sponsorship would change visibility and increase equitability in opportunity for women in the leadership pipeline, Forbes has argued that intrapreneurship is one way to fast track women to high-profile and high-potential initiatives, build leadership profiles and ultimately boost female executive numbers.

But also, in the same way that entrepreneurial spirit implies an intrinsic fire, an intrapreneurial spirit does not wait around to be assigned a task. Nor should you wait for permission, if you resonate with an intrapreneurial mindset.

An Intrapreneurial Mindset

Senior leaders have told us about the value of holding an intrapreneurial attitude – which we’ve counted among top tips for elevating your leadership mindset.

Linda Descano, Executive Vice President at Red Havas, told us: “So as I think of being an ‘intrapreneurial executive,’ I bring that same sense of acting like an owner to the organization I work for. I’m going to be constantly thinking about ways of improving the business. I act like I own it, as if it’s my investment. It’s working with that same sense of responsibility and drive to make it grow.”

Indhira Arrington, Global CDEIO at Ares Management, asked: “Outside of your day job responsibilities, what are you doing to contribute to the greater good of the organization and to make yourself an impact player? Anybody can get work done. People want to promote impact players.”

With creative passion and risk-tolerance akin to entrepreneurs, intrapreneurs focus on evolving the business from within. They see opportunities that are not obvious to others. They are willing to take risks, expansive in their thinking and often dynamic in their network. They keep an eye towards opportunities. They understand the internal cultural context and external business context.

Intrapreneurs are also ideas-driven and intrinsically motivated to break down barriers and collaborate with others to make new things happen at scalable levels. That often involves going outside of departmental silos and means impacting your surroundings in a way that goes above and beyond your job description. It requires stakeholder management and ability to manage upwards, as well as project management.

It also means being organizationally savvy and knowing how to sell and pre-sell your ideas. It requires a high level of accountability, resilience and willingness to see failure as a valuable part of the journey.

As written by Tendayi Wiki in Forbes, intrapreneurs need to have a particular mindset because they are operating within larger organizations. They need to focus on creating tangible value for the organization or clients, not just on the ‘theater of innovation.’ They focus on building relationships to garner support and enthusiasm and focus on getting others behind the clear value proposition of their ideas. They also have an ‘ecosystem mindset’ that focuses on identifying repeatable processes that will apply for future projects and build environments for ideas to emerge.

The Organizational Context of Intrapreneurship

According to Samantha Paxson, CMO of CO-OP Financial Services, “What makes intrapreneurs so successful is their empathy toward colleagues’ challenges and their ability to apply critical creativity to generate new ideas.”

Paxson argues that intrapreneurship draws upon innately feminine leadership qualities of being receptive to how to better serve colleagues, clients or customers from a leadership stance. She points out that research has indicated that women score higher than men in 3/4 of the important leadership competencies that support intrapreneurshi – including taking initiative, motivating and developing others, championing change, collaboration and teamwork, problem-solving and driving results.

Though according to Women Unlimited, Inc, intrapreneurship requires two sides – both the intrapreneurial mindset and an environment that is ready to support it (and from that individual).

Organizational characteristics conducive to supporting intrapreneurism include:

  • Regularly soliciting new ideas and input from employees at all levels
  • Ideas incentive funds
  • Fostering inter-departmental collaboration
  • Monitoring customer opinions relevant to products and services
  • Creating an environment where employees are free to speak up
  • Setting aside an in-house venture capital fund
  • Rewarding innovative ideas monetarily
  • Holding training and immersions to encourage and spark employee creativity
  • Encourage fun, creativity and innovation in the environment

How many women of color have left the corporate workplace for entrepreneurialism because they did not find an environment which was prepared to fully include their intrapreneurial mindset? An important part of encouraging an intrapreneurial mindset is that individuals are validated and rewarded for what they bring forward.

And sometimes, as Claudia Vazquez, Founder of elevink told us, it requires refusing to let go of the vision, and waiting for new opportunities and new angles, or even new contexts, to drive ahead.

Cultivating Creativity For an Intrapreneurial Mindset

While there are many components to an intrapreneurial mindset, and not everyone wants to take up that role, it’s possible to build up the qualities that support it.

Some playful advice for improving the muscle of your creative intelligence to support your ability to cultivate an intrapreneurial mindset includes:

  • Physical agility: Move your body and make changes in your physical environment when you feel creatively stuck.
  • Emotional agility: Become self-aware of your emotions, as the ability to name and regulate your emotions is tied to creative performance.
  • Mental agility: Embrace the symbiotic relationship in creativity between generating ideas and being able to apply creative thinking to those ideas.
  • Curiosity: A passionate level of curiosity is often required to catalyze the desire to create, so follow the thread of curiosity and nurture it.
  • Self-belief: Valuing your unique perspective and contribution is important to allowing self-belief to build momentum behind your ideas.
  • Intuition: Trusting and validating your intuition and gut instinct – when you know without knowing how you know – is critical in seeing new possibilities.
  • Daydreaming: The productive activity of letting your mind wander is correlated with higher intellect and creative ability.

If you hold an intrapreneurial mindset, embrace it as a leadership asset and find a culture in which you can thrive for your ability to cast your vision above and beyond the day job.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

Why Creating Inclusion at Senior Levels Requires Formal Sponsorship

, ,

formal sponsorshipInformal sponsorship and mentorship can proliferate inequitable power dynamics in organizations. Organic sponsorship is a big part of how leadership proactively recasts the pipeline in the majority image. Meanwhile, the status quo power dynamic inhibits individuals who are in the minority among leadership from lifting others up behind them.

(This contribution from Pulsely dives into how informal sponsorship works to reinforce the glass ceiling).

Here’s one core way in which your organization is perpetuating inequitable power dynamics at senior levels: informal sponsorship and mentorship.

When you connect the dots of power, organic sponsorship is a big part of how leadership proactively, repetitively, and, by default, recasts the pipeline in the majority image. Meanwhile, the status quo power dynamic inhibits individuals who are in the minority among leadership from lifting others up behind them.

We offer a six point case for why leadership inclusion requires formal sponsorship programs that are deliberately disruptive in creating more equitable opportunities.

Mentorship and Sponsorship – What It Really Means

When it comes to career advancement, mentorship is both necessary and not enough. The common distinction is: a mentor talks with you, a sponsor talks about you.

A mentorship is 1-1. Mentors help you within your journey. They help you to navigate the intersection of your goals and career choices, identify and amplify strengths, and develop in core areas. Mentorship often acts as a trustworthy mirror for personal growth.

A sponsorship is more than 1-1. A sponsor relationship is 1-1+ an audience of power. Sponsors put skin and reputation in the game by leveraging their social capital (influence) in rooms you’ve yet to enter, and advocate for opportunities and advancement for you among their peers. The protégé also has the motivation of stepping up to the challenge because the sponsor’s reputation is on the line, too. Sponsorship often acts as a spotlight that shines on you to lift you up to the next level of career advancement.

As written by Rosalind Chow in Harvard Business Review, “Sponsorship can be understood as a form of intermediated impression management, where sponsors act as brand managers and publicists for their protégés. This work involves the management of others’ views on the sponsored employee. Thus, the relationship at the heart of sponsorship is not between protégés and sponsors, as is often thought, but between sponsors and an audience — the people they mean to sway to the side of their protégés.”

Why Informal Mentorship and Sponsorship Are Inequitable

“Regardless of education, motivation, and personal and professional success factors, being sponsored by a white man remains the primary accelerant to the career mobility of Black women.” (Stephanie Bradley Smith in HBR)

As this quote underlines, and Catalyst iterates in Sponsoring Women to Success, “Sponsorship is focused on advancement and predicated on power.”

The dynamic of organic sponsorship is ultimately majority promoting majority, with the same repeated outcome at leadership, save minor and temporary shifts. Even the common phrase of “winning sponsorship” has a blinding and dubious premise.

While data from different surveys inevitably differs on absolutes (for example, the % of people who report they have a sponsor is highly contextual to the criteria), what remains steady across studies is a debilitating power gap between individuals of the majority and non-majority when it comes to both sponsorship and who they are sponsored by.

Here’s what reproduces the current senior management and leadership profile:

1. Mentorship and especially executive sponsorship have a catalytic impact on career advancement for both protégés and sponsors.

  • Male managers with sponsorship are 23% more likely (female managers with sponsorship are 19% more likely) to progress to the next rung of the career ladder than peers who do not have sponsors.
  • Managers and executives who sponsor high-achieving junior talent are 53% more likely to advance to the next leadership level relative to peers who don’t sponsor.

2. Access to mentorship and executive sponsorship is highly variable depending on who you are, regardless of performance = inequitable.

3. Mentorship and sponsorship are especially necessary to advance women and people of color.

  • Black managers are 65% more likely to progress to the next rung in the ladder if they have a sponsor.
  • Mentorship programs increase representation of Black, Hispanic, and Asian-American women, and Hispanic and Asian-American men, by 9% to 24%.
  • Having mentors and sponsors who advocated for them is the single attribute shared by people of color who have progressed furthest in the leadership ranks.
  • Executive sponsorship has been proven to be the most effective organizational intervention to advance Black talent.
  • Latina women with sponsorship earn 6.1% more than peers who lack sponsors and black women earn 5.1% more.

4. But people tend to mentor and sponsor those just like them – and this means the majority (with the power) mostly sponsors the majority.

  • 61% of people indicate their mentorship developed naturally.
  • As much as 91% of white managers have no Black, Asian, or Latinx people in their immediate social network.
  • 71% of sponsors report their protégé is the same race or gender as their own.
  • 58% of women and 54% of men who sponsor choose a protégé because they “make me feel comfortable.”
  • A study of 72 protégés found that 100% of sponsors of white male protégés were men and the majority (73.5%) were white. Among Black female protégés, most sponsors were Black (57%) and 27% were women.
  • Payscale found 77.1 percent of male protégés said they had a male sponsor while women were about half as likely to have a male sponsor.
  • Payscale found 90% of white men and women protégés reported they had a white sponsor, while Blacks and Hispanics were 35% less likely to.

5. Not only are there far fewer female and minority senior leaders, but increased personal career risk can hinder their sponsoring.

  • Women hold only 1/4 of executive roles in the 1000 largest companies and BIPOCs make up only 17% of the C-suite.
  • Despite a desire and even a higher sense of obligation to lift others of similar sex/gender up (26% for Black leaders vs. 20% for Hispanic and Asian and 7% for Caucasian), Black senior leaders face higher scrutiny and are 26% less likely to commit to being a sponsor than white executives.
  • More than one third of black leaders report they never sponsor a junior talent who looks like them – despite often wanting to, at tension with personal career risk.

6. To further the gap, white and male sponsors hold more influence on outcomes of their protégé’s employment than those from the non-majority groups.

  • In U.S. law firms and among lawyers who had sponsorship, white men were half as likely (30%) as women of color (62%) to feel that the lack of an influential mentor was a barrier to their advancement.
  • Payscale found: black women with black sponsors are paid 11.3% less than black women with white sponsors; Hispanic women with Hispanic sponsors make 15.5% less than those with white sponsors; women with women sponsors make 14.6% less than those with male sponsors, and even men with female sponsors make 8.7% less than those with male sponsors. Payscale notes the gaps shrink after compensable factors are weighed in, but the gap remains.

If you want to introduce more equity into talent development, you cannot look away from the affinity bias-based pattern of those with high social capital using that power and influence to promote those who look like them into power, too, while also further advancing their own status. Nor can you look away from how the non-majority individuals who break through to leadership are inhibited from doing the same.

Formal mentorship and sponsorship programs are about deliberately disrupting the cycle of inequitable talent development that has strongly influenced your management and leadership to date. In the next article, we explore how in more detail.

‍Guest contribution: Originally published on the Pulsely blog, written by Aimee Hansen. Pulsely delivers diversity and inclusion diagnostics and actionable DEI insights to drive inclusion, equity, and performance. Pulsely’s scientific framework combines the power of understanding four key drivers of inclusion: diversity data, workplace inclusion, inclusion competencies, and performance indicators. To learn more, visit Pulsely, read an interview with Co-Founder Betsy Bagley, or check out the Pulsely blog to find more content like this. 

/by

Latina Inclusion: Do Not Check Your Identity at The Door!

, ,

Latina Inclusion FeatureThe gap in Latina leadership in Corporate America is still an inclusion issue. But as more Latinas decide to go where they are valued, it’s Corporate America that is losing out the most – and more so in the future.

Hispanic and Latina women comprise only 1.6% of senior executives in the U.S.’s largest companies, less than other major demographic groups. USA TODAY reviewed 92 companies in the S&P 100 and found 18 had no Latinas in senior executive positions: including Apple, CostCo and Netflix. While few had a proportion equal to representation in the U.S. Workforce, PepsiCo, Procter & Gamble and Visa came closest.

It’s not just senior management: Latinas are underrepresented as only 4.4% of managers and 3.2% of professionals. And, according to the Latino Corporate Directors Association, Latinas hold only 1% of board seats in Fortune 500 companies, fewer than other gender or ethnic groups. But Latinas comprise 16% of the female labor force – the largest group behind white women, and by 2029, are projected to be 9.3% of the total US labor force.

Hispanic women earned 16.4% of bachelor’s degrees and 12.3% of master’s degrees in 2020, and Latinas represent 56% of Latinx students, though Latinx enrollment has taken some hit since the pandemic. Over two million Latina-owned small businesses exist – the fastest growing segment of the business community – with over 87% growth in business numbers since 2007. Latinas are creating business six times faster than any other group.

Barriers to Inclusion

Comprising 19% of the population and growing, Hispanic buying power continues to accelerate and demand that organizations understand this market.

While Latina women should have good reason to feel more emboldened than ever to bring their full identities to work through culturally relevant Latina leadership, they continue to be under-supported to do so and underpaid by corporate America.

When it comes to the paycheck, Latinas earn 55 cents for every dollar earned by non-Latino white men: even in the exact same job. Latinas earn 28% less than white women. The pay gap is also widest for Latinas with college degrees.

While Latinas ask for promotions and raises at similar rates to white men, the “broken rung” is exposed when you consider that Latinas are only 71% as likely as men in general to be promoted. Only 19% of Latinas feel supported by white co-workers. Only 5% of Latinos overall in big companies say they have a sponsor, whereas Latinos who do have sponsors are 42% more likely to be satisfied with career progression. Latinas who have reached executive levels often report the importance of that sponsorship in reaching where they are.

Latinas have reported being cast as caretakers, or the media image of ‘jefa of the household,’ rather than corporate leaders. Latinas are arguably more culturally wired for community building, a deeply held value which they often practice at home and that would serve organizations, but the value of individualism still dominates vertical mobility.

Latina women also report, according to Esther Aguilera, CEO of the Latino Corporate Directors Association, having to overcome biases around accents and myths and misperceptions around capabilities – which leads to a cycle, as we’ve heard echoed at The Glass Hammer this month, of Latina execs still feeling the internal drive of needing to prove themselves.

Indeed, 63% of Hispanic leaders indicated they have to work harder because of their ethnicity. And two in three Hispanic professionals felt educating coworkers around DEI falls upon them, spending substantial time whether it relates to their job or expertise.

Compared to non-Hispanic peers, Hispanic professionals are 53% less likely to feel included at work and 53% less likely to say they’re comfortable fully expressing their identities at work. Latina women have reported having to “check their identity at the door” or adjust their persona (code-switch) to fit into white masculine stereotypes of leadership.

The Post-Pandemic Impact

So it may come as no surprise that UCLA found that Latinas are leaving the workforce at higher rates than any other major demographic. Between March 2020 and March 2021, the workforce lost 336,000 Latinas, a drop of 2.74% in the workforce. Perhaps the promise of the American dream became too far stretched in reality for some, taking too much emotional, mental and physical toll without enough reward. One qualitative study found that senior level Latina talent were exiting Corporate America because of poor culture fit and a lack of evidence that Latinas were being structurally promoted.

“The Latina Pathway to Excellence in a Post-Pandemic World” report shared how the pandemic had changed the employment outlook of many Latinas. They both felt more invisible and yet found a “new virtual world confidence” in which they’ve learned to promote their profile more authentically at a professional level.

Mid-career Latinas expressed challenges such as: difficulty in maintaining their true selves in the workplace, a lack of champions they could identify with and trust, a lack of management check-ins, and lack of access to upper management. They emphasized the value of knowing your unique gifts and individual brand and leveraging the value that intersectionality brings to the table.

Executive-level leaders discussed promoting your distinct qualities, developing more skills and taking risks to seize opportunities amidst reduced visibility. They emphasized the importance of overcoming imposter syndrome as well as cultural Latin gender norms, being ‘ready to represent’ at the upper echelons amidst disproportionate scrutiny, and seeking mentorship and sponsorship (many had been sponsored by Latino men). They also encouraged trusting in the “Latina 6th sense” of intuition and decision making. Some C-Suite Latinas had leveraged the virtual meeting place to create new connections and visibility with senior leaders.

As written in Be Latina, “The growth of the virtual world allowed, in certain ways, for ‘authenticity in the business world.’”

It’s about Latina Inclusion

So what about organizations that want to get serious about promoting Latina talent? The answer is valuing the culture add and fostering cultural inclusion. At base level, greater inclusion for Hispanic and Latina women requires at least three things:

  1. Address unconscious bias in talent management decisions – Too many talent decisions are riddled in bias at each level (hiring, promotion, pay) and inhibiting organizations from leveraging and promoting Latina talent. From entry level recruitment to promotion to senior posts to pay packages, it’s possible to identify and shake up the way approaches have kept Latina talent from top positions.
  2. Make sponsorship happen – Ideally through formal sponsorship programs, managers and senior leaders should be challenged to reach beyond their own affinity bias and the gap in sponsorship for Latina women must close to transcend the block to corporate leadership.
  3. Encourage authenticity – Build a culture that celebrates each individual’s perspective, and the intersectionality that often informs that perspective, rather than pressures Latina women to forgo their wholeness to belong in the corporate workplace.
Please Don’t Check Your Identity!

Ask Hispanic and Latina executives, and showing up authentically can be the biggest challenge, but ultimately, there’s no path to stronger performance and personal fulfillment than being able to be who you are.

Latina women are bicultural, bilingual and possess many aspects of cultural wealth that can be leveraged as a leader. In part because of what it’s taken to get this far, Latinas often have developed strong skillsets of resilience, creativity, optimism, social ease, charisma, passion, relationship-building, multi-tasking and adaptability.

It’s recommended that Latinas who wish to thrive look for strong cultural fits that will value your whole selves, be persistent and also know when to adapt and take risks to overcome barriers. It’s important to accept imperfection in selves and others and be grounded in your ethnic background while navigating two cultures. Surround yourselves with mentors and those who can support your advancement.

One hunch about Latina leadership: it’s happening and those who embrace cultural diversity and inclusion will know the advantage of leveraging it.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

Shattering the Glass Ceiling Is Great But Why Are We Ignoring the Fallout?

, ,

shattering the glass ceiling Shattering a glass ceiling has become synonymous with success for the working woman. Many individuals, groups and even some organizations dedicate energy, attention and resources to helping women do exactly that. But what happens when these women finally do break through the glass ceiling? What comes next?

Anyone who has ever had the surprise of dropping a glass cup or bowl knows that shattering the glass is only the beginning. React too quickly or carelessly and someone ends up with a cut or, worse, in the E.R. for stitches. Yet we aren’t reacting with the same care and caution for women who shatter the glass ceiling only to be left bearing the weight of the damage.

We expect the struggle to be over when a woman breaks through a glass ceiling but even when it looks positive on the outside, the fallout from breaking through continues to perpetuate harm. Even when women reach the proverbial top, many aren’t psychologically safe, which can lead to more damage and harm.

We see this as evidenced by an increased lack of inclusion and belonging often coming from both the team they have left and the new team they’ve just entered. Health and wellness suffer. Feelings of isolation and loneliness increase while the pressure to perform increases. Despite their achievement, they are still expected to work twice as hard to keep their new status and prove they deserve that status to the people who aren’t used to seeing a woman at the top.

The implications of leaving this reality unchecked are too high—it’s time to expand our care for women in the workplace to include those at the top of their teams, departments and organizations.

1. Acknowledge the harm.

Most women who shatter the glass ceiling have had an arduous journey. Acknowledging what they likely went through due to systemic injustices is a great way to show “I hear you and I see you.” This helps build the trust required to provide additional care for the aftermath of their journey.

2. Provide a mentor.

The journey does not stop once a woman gets into their first leadership role or rises in the ranks. It will be important that women are intentionally matched with those who can support and sponsor them as they heal and settle into their new roles.

3. Amplify women’s voices.

It’s critical that when a woman enters a new team, their voice is welcomed and valued. One great way to welcome any new team member is to prompt them for their feedback and opinions in meetings first. This will allow them to genuinely share their perspectives without feeling they must agree with others.

4. Applaud women publicly.

As important as amplifying a woman’s voice is celebrating their voice. When a woman comes up with an innovative solution to a long-standing problem or gives an amazing presentation, give credit where it’s due. Often women’s accomplishments are not uplifted or celebrated. Worse, their credit may be taken by someone who is more vocal. Applauding women is not limited to when they are in the room; coworkers should be as willing to provide credit when they are not around.

5. Check in.

This may be the simplest yet most important of the actions. Once a woman “makes it,” it’s often assumed that she will no longer face the problems that other women face early in their careers. Unfortunately, it can be just as hard at the top, and support from a supervisor will be an essential part of feeling a sense of inclusion and belonging. This support can look like scheduling quarterly career conversations outside of performance reviews, scheduling a lunch with the sole goal of getting to know the woman better and asking about how the employee would like to receive feedback and respecting that preference when possible.

6. Advocate for equitable resources.

Individual efforts like the above are great and they help, but we also need to advocate for company policies that support women after they shatter a glass ceiling. These policies include complementary safety measures that not only encourage women to grow and advance in the workplace but also guarantee continued protection and care as they move along their career path. Measures like mental health and pregnancy support for women pre and post promotion can help ensure that women and those in underrepresented groups safely reach their leadership destinations whether they’re working toward a C-Suite or the White House.

The harm many women experience after shattering the glass ceiling is not something we can ignore. Progress has not kept pace with changing demographics, and we are still seeing too many instances of women being in a role for the first time, especially those in underrepresented groups.

Women need our help now. It is not enough to fix this problem for future generations or plan to have a solution in the next 30 years. Whether you are in a leadership role or not, we all have a responsibility to ensure that women are celebrated, not just tolerated, and given equal opportunity to learn, grow and thrive. It’s not enough for a woman to be invited to a room to sit at the table; their voice needs to be heard and valued even after they shatter the glass ceiling.

By: Antoinetta Mosley is the CEO and Principal Leader at I Follow the Leader LLC, a strategic consulting firm specializing in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) strategy, initiatives, and education. As a Certified Diversity Professional (CDP), Antoinetta has worked on a range of projects for organizations of all sizes, including small to global nonprofits as well as Fortune 500 companies and travels the country as a sought-after speaker on DEI, courageous conversations, and belonging in the workplace. She teaches DEI for Arlan Hamilton’s Arlan’s Academy, has been featured in The New York Times.

The opinions and views of guest contributions are not necessarily those of theglasshammer.com

/by

Truth Check-In: Is Your DEI Performative or Genuine?

,

performative DEI Too many leaders and organizations aren’t making it over the basic hurdles of credibility when it comes to employee well-being policies and DEI policies: that people believe what you say is truthful and that you’re committed to act in the ways you say.

Indeed, the Women in The Workplace 2021 report found that while 70% of companies say DEI is critical, only 25% of them are formally recognizing the work. Only 2/3 are holding senior leaders accountable, less than 1/3 hold managers accountable and even when it’s claimed leaders are held accountable, diversity goals make it into performance reviews less than half of the time.

Other research has shown that leaders are nearly twice as likely as their employees to perceive they are creating empowering and inclusive environments. And a Korn Ferry study of 24,000 leadership assessments revealed that only 5% of leaders globally would qualify as inclusive leaders. And while U.S. organizations pledged to spend up to $60 billion on racial equity initiatives, one year later only $250 million had been committed to specific initiatives.

In short: DEI words are not aligning to perceptions and in many cases, actions.

Are Organizations Being Performative or Genuine?

In a study of 7,000 people across 14 countries, Catalyst found that employees are more likely to perceive the Covid-19 and racial equity polices of their organizations in the last couple years to be merely performative.

More than 2/3 of employees feel their organization’s pandemic-related policies for care and safety were not genuine and 3/4 of employees feel their organization’s racial equity policies are not genuine. Employees from marginalized racial and ethnic groups were even less likely to view the latter as genuine (23%) than white employees (29%).

Here’s some ways organizations come across as non-genuine: talk without action, virtue signaling in social media or staff e-mails without visible follow-through, announcing plans such as training that don’t get implemented, over-claiming advances from minor policy updates, pledging funds that don’t get invested, putting new DEI positions in place without empowering these individuals with decision-making and resource, making big one-off claims while ignoring daily incidents of bias and exclusion, allowing remote work without being flexible for caretaking needs, and talking about burnout without doing anything to counter unmanageable workloads or 24/7 “on” culture.

Are companies failing to communicate or failing to convert talk into real steps of change? Based on Catalyst’s analysis, most organizational behavior around DEI is perceived as insincere – which can ultimately lead to people questioning the moral character, ethics and overall values of the organization; erode trust in leaders and the organization; and decrease team performance and productivity. Candidates also prefer to work for organizations that are perceived as having high moral character.

Is Pushing the Business Case Rationale Helping?

Meanwhile, in Harvard Business Review, Oriane Georgac and Aneeta Rattan reveal that how the majority (80%) of Fortune 500 companies explain their interest in diversity – through the business case of benefitting the bottom line – actually puts off candidates, and creates a 6% drop in feeling the commitment to diversity is genuine.

The researchers found about 80% of companies use the business case, 5% use the fariness/moral case, and 15% do not explain why they value diversity or do not list it as a value.

The business case is most off-putting to job candidates. Underrepresented participants exposed to a job posting that provided a business case explanation for valuing diversity anticipated to experience less sense of belonging (11% vs fairness explanation; 27% vs neutral message), were more concerned about being stereotyped (16% vs fairness; 27% vs neutral) and were more concerned they would be seen as interchangeable with members of their identity group (10% vs fairness; 21% vs neutral).

The researchers argue the business case backfires because it subtly positions ‘diverse’ employees as a means to an end, rather than valued in themselves as individuals. In that equation, the “benefits” that diversity provides – different skills, perspectives, experiences, working styles – could make candidates feel they will be depersonalized and stereotyped, as opposed to seen for who they are.

The researchers found the fairness case (which sees diversity as its own end) made people feel more positive about organizations than the business case, halving the negative impact. But the best approach was to express diversity was a value without explaining the why: “If you don’t need an explanation for the presence of well-represented groups in the workplace beyond their expertise, then you don’t need a justification for the presence of underrepresented groups either.”

The researchers argue that when something is truly a core value (such as innovation or integrity), you don’t try to convince others why. Why an organization should value integrity, for example, is not up for discussion. So why does diversity require a justification, or convincing?

Empathetic Leadership And Genuine Action

Going back to the Catalyst work, truly genuine policies “are aligned with the stated values of the organization, motivated by care and concern for employees, and thoughtfully implemented.”

Organizations show they are genuine by: taking a stand both externally and internally, admitting bias and being transparent (including data) about the organization’s current diversity and inclusion, providing safe spaces for employees to report feeling psychologically unsafe, taking actual steps to remove bias, empowering employees to create resource groups, taking visible steps to diversify senior leadership, being consistent in communication and actions around DEI, treating everyone with respect, celebrating cultural heritage and bringing DEI experts on board.

The employees who actually do perceive their organization’s policies as genuine (whether Covid-related or racial equity) experience many benefits: more inclusion, engagement, feelings of respect and value for their life circumstances, ability to balance life-work demands, and intention to stay with their jobs.

Further, perceiving empathy in senior leaders is a key determinant to whether policies are perceived positively and sincerely. An empathetic leader “demonstrates care, concern and understanding for employees’ life circumstances.”

When a leader authentically “gets it” from an intrinsic standpoint, they are more likely to commit: previous research by Harvard Business Review Analytics found that among companies who are “DEI Laggard,” 50% of people feel a lack of leadership commitment hinders their DEI efforts. Whereas “DEI Leader” organizations are more than twice as likely as Laggards (77% vs. 34%) to have visible executive support.

Catalyst found employees who perceive both empathetic leaders and genuine Covid policies have less burnout than others (about 30% less). Among employees of color, the combination of genuine policies and empathetic leaders increases inclusion – and there is a general halo effect on women feeling more respected, valued and engaged, too.

The Call To Interconnected Leadership

Research has shown that “the ability of a leader to be empathetic and compassionate has the greatest impact on organizational profitability and productivity.” The research from HBR Analytics indicates that DEI Leaders have two clear things in common: “a commitment from leadership and a commitment to data.” Indeed, the most important factors in creating a culture of inclusion are leadership commitment and demonstrating a visible awareness of the bias within oneself and the organization.

Empathy is a distinct component of emotional intelligence, which becomes increasingly important with seniority in leadership: at executive level, emotional intelligence accounts for 80% to 90% of the abilities that distinguish high performers. An empathetic leader can also own fallibility and personal and organizational susceptibility to systemic realities like institutional racism and sexism, and rise to that challenge.

Catalyst found that having a highly empathetic leadership (versus less empathetic leadership) makes a huge difference in an employee feeling regularly innovative at work (61% vs 13%), feeling engaged at work (76% vs 32%), feeling included (50% vs 17%), feeling able to navigate work/life demands (86% vs 60%), and having fewer thoughts about leaving.

The question is does leadership really “get it?” Do leaders see the reshaping of power structures to harness diversity and the inclusion of all employees as win-wins for themselves, others and the organization? Could we have more that do?

As previously shared, the late Bell Hooks said equity would require a revolution of self-actualization and any real movement of social justice would be based in the ethic of love, where we would recognize that oppression and exclusion cost too much to every single one of us, including those who benefit: “The moment we choose to love we begin to move against domination, against oppression. The moment we choose to love we begin to move towards freedom, to act in ways that liberate ourselves and others.”

Intrinsic motivation does not come from the societal or legal pressure to do something, the business case or even the fairness argument: it’s beyond all that. When more organizations start demonstrating they truly “get it,” we will not be wondering if it’s genuine.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

Lead with Clarity: How to Change Up Your Perceptual Lens

,

perceptual lensMost of us think that our beliefs are truth. But beliefs are not facts. Rather, they are a core part of
 our perceptual lens, and thus very powerful in shaping our everyday experiences.

Psychologists refer to this as a perceptual set – a predisposition to perceive things in a certain 
way, which leads us to notice only certain aspects of an object or situation while ignoring other
 details. I like to refer to these as perceptual lenses, because it’s literally the “lens” which you
 unconsciously and subconsciously perceive the world through that’s driving your behavior.

There are all kinds of perceptual lenses, and each of us tends to use, and overuse, our own few
 personal favorites. For example, when someone has a competitive lens, they will relate to almost
 any situation as though it is a competition, whether or not any such competition exists. Someone
 with a binary lens will relate to most situations as if there is only one right answer, and
 everything and everyone else is wrong.

Typically, we each have a few favorites that we apply no matter what the context. Because we
 are using these few lenses by default, they often are not appropriate to the context. We need to
 expand past our tired old playlist.

There are two kinds of lenses: generally helpful lenses, and those that are impeding when 
overused.

Generally helpful lenses:
  • Collaborative lens. The I-win-when-you-win-approach.
  • Optimistic lens. “Everything always works out for the best, even if it doesn’t seem so in the moment.”
  • Create possibility lens. It temporarily sets aside all perceived obstacles, problems, or doubts, in order to give you freedom to imagine an ideal.
  • Opportunity lens. With this lens, you ask yourself, “How can I find an opportunity in whatever situation I face?”
Impeding lenses:
  • “Problems to fix” or “what’s wrong” lens. With this lens, someone is always looking
 for something to go wrong; they are always wondering what can go wrong here, what
 will go wrong here?
  • Victim lens. “It doesn’t matter anyway.” “I can’t make a difference.” “Bad things always happen to me.”
  • Distrust/“It’s not safe” lens. A person with this lens operates from a default position that the world around them is inherently dangerous.
  • Binary/“black or white” lens. With this lens, a person tends to view situations as “either/or.” There’s no gray area, there’s no middle ground.

Each of these lenses has its own set of underlying beliefs and assumptions. You see what your
 lens shows you.

If you habitually default to the same lens all of the time, in every situation, then you are not 
perceiving the actual circumstances and environment around you. You are seeing only what your
 lens shows you. You are making assumptions instead of gleaning useful data that would more
 constructively guide your choices and actions.

You can’t be human and be without any lenses, but you can be aware of your lens, as well as be 
intentional about choosing an appropriate lens for any given situation. There is a place for a 
competitive lens and a collaborative lens, for a problems lens and an opportunity lens, and so on.
 What does not serve us is to blindly and automatically apply one lens across the board no matter
 what is actually happening.

Road Bump To Choosing A New Lens: You’re Attached To Your Story

You can’t change your lens while wearing your current lens. The people who have the hardest
 time transforming their leadership, or their lives, are those who hold onto their own story very,
 very tightly. Their self-image is dependent upon them being “the one who always_________.”
 The one who’s always right. The one who never gets what they want. The one who always 
achieves. The one who always cleans up after others. The one who’s the smartest. The one who 
is always betrayed. When you are so locked into your story, then a change of perceptual lens can 
feel destabilizing. If you aren’t the one who always is this or that, or who does this or that, then 
who are you?

When you step into the unfamiliar territory of using a new lens, you need to be willing to “try” it 
out. On some level you will feel some relief—because you are choosing a lens that empowers
 you— but on another level you are likely to resist the feeling of change.

Recognize your discomfort for what it is: your ego’s inner defenses against change. The 
solution? Acknowledge that discomfort while trying on the new lens— even though it feels odd,
 contradictory, or just plain impossible. You keep doing that again and again until the new lens 
can start to stay in place, and the new lens becomes the new you.

Initially, you aren’t going to have “proof ” that any of these helpful lenses will bring you better 
results than your current, impeding lens. You can only give them a try. Be curious, open,
 experimental. Lean into it. Doing so increases your options. And pay attention to what happens; 
observe your new results. Loosen up on your own story until you really get that your story is not
 you. That’s the only way that true change can happen.

By: Jody Michael is the author of Leading Lightly: Lower Your Stress, Think with Clarity, and Lead with Ease (Greenleaf Book Group Press, 2022). She is CEO of Jody Michael Associates, a coaching company specializing in executive coaching, leadership development, and career coaching. She is recognized as one of the top 4% of coaches worldwide and is an internationally credentialed Master Certified Coach, Board Certified Coach, University of Chicago trained psychotherapist, and Licensed Clinical Social Worker.

/by

Beyond Pride Month: LGBTQ+ Inclusion Is About Every Single Day

, ,

LGBTQ+ InclusionLGBTQ+ is a form of invisible diversity that is both growing and significantly changing, especially among younger generations. Yet, many LGBTQ+ employees continue to report a lack of real inclusion and safety in the workplace.

During Pride Month, let’s remember why valuing LGBTQ+ employees is not just about a month of celebration, adapted logos and rainbow flags – but about a deep commitment to building LGBTQ+ inclusive and safe workplaces that allow all individuals to contribute and thrive every single day.

Underrepresentation for LGBTQ+ From Entry to Leadership

According to Gallup in 2021, 7.1% of the U.S. identifies as LGBTQ+ (doubling since 2012) and 21% of Gen Z do (twice the proportion of millennials). LGBTQ+ identification is increasing across major racial and ethnic groups – giving rise to more diverse, intersectional identities.

Yet under-representation in the workplace for LGBTQ+ groups begins at entry level. McKinsey found that LGBTQ+ women are underrepresented by more than half, even at entry level. Meanwhile at the top, only .5% of the board seats in the Fortune 500 are held by openly LGBTQ+ directors and only a few Fortune 500 CEOs are openly gay, including one woman. One transgender woman leads a Fortune 1000 company. The lack of visible LGBTQ+ executive leadership limits visible role models for younger talent.

LGBTQ+ men (80%) are more likely to be out than LGBTQ+ women (58%). Senior LGBTQ+ leaders (80%) are more out than junior employees (32%), even though their peers are more accepting and demand inclusivity in the workplace.

Globally, the World Economic Forum is advocating for LGBTQ+ visibilty: more LGBTQ+ representation in business and media that tells more diverse and inclusive stories of LGBTQ+ individuals, to advance both equality and acceptance. LGBTQ+ community members report feeling least authentically represented in media depictions. And while 63% of non-LGBTQ+ people perceive the “community” as one collective group with similar needs, the reality of a changing LGBTQ+ culture has never been further away.

While LGBTQ+ acceptance has grown globally since 1981, an unprecedented number of anti-LGBTQ+ bills are proposed in U.S. state legislatures, 71 countries still criminalize consensual same-sex sexual activity, 15 countries criminalize the gender identity and/or expression of transgender people and 11 countries deem consensual same-sex relations punishable by death.

LGBTQ+ Experiences In the Workplace

A LinkedIn survey of LBGTQ professionals found 24% were not open about their identity at work and 26% feared they’d be treated differently by coworkers, echoing McKinsey’s findings that one in four LGBTQ+ employees are not out at work.

McKinsey research found that half of out LGBTQ+ individuals have to come out at least once a week: especially challenging for women, junior employees, and people outside Europe and North America. BCG found 40% of U.S. LGBTQ employees are closeted at work and that 75% have experienced negative day-to-day workplace interactions related to their identity.

Yet being out has helped many to access more of their potential. According to LinkedIn, LGBTQ+ individuals report being open at work helps them connect with others for support and build better relationships. According to McKinsey, individuals experience greater well-being and are more able to focus on work. Those who are out are far less likely to plan to leave their current employer. But in absence of strong cultures of inclusion, many are deterred or facing headwinds.

According to CIPD research on LGBTQ+ inclusion, LGB+ employees (40%) and trans employees (55%) experience more workplace conflict and harassment than heterosexual employees (29%) and feel less psychological safety. LinkedIn found 31% reported facing discrimination or microaggressions at work.

Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law also found that nearly half (46%) of LGBT workers have experienced unfair treatment at work, such as harassment, dismissal or hiring discrimination based on their LGBT status. Nearly one-fourth have experienced discrimination when applying for jobs, and even more so for transgender workers.

67% of LGBT workers have heard slurs, jokes and negative comments about LGBT people. Half are not out to their supervisors. While 40% of LGBT cis-gender employees are likely to adopt behaviors to “cover,” nearly 60% of transgender employees are. Trans individuals are twice as likely to hear sexist jokes about people of their gender, three times more likely to feel they can’t talk about life outside of work, and think more often about leaving.

When it comes to advancing, McKinsey reports that many LGBTQ+ employees believe they have to outperform non-LGBTQ+ colleagues to gain recognition and 40% of LGBTQ+ women feel they need to provide extra evidence of their competence. Compared to 2/3 of non-LGBTQ+ employees, only half of LGBTQ+ respondents saw people like themselves in management positions at their organizations. Less than 1 in 4 of have an LGBTQ+ sponsor, even though senior LGBTQ+ leaders are twice as likely as straight and cis-gender peers to credit sponsors for their own career growth.

LGBTQ+ employees earn 90% on every $1 and transgender employees make 32% less per year than their cisgender peers. 1 in 3 LGBTQ+ U.S. employees feel discrimination has impacted their promotion or salary levels.

And a study published in the Journal of Business and Psychology found that leaders with same-sex sexual orientation are perceived to be less effective and receive less follower conformity than heterosexual leaders, regardless of gender presentation or biological gender, especially among male followers (women followers were more supportive). The researchers note that extra care must be taken to ensure same-sex sexual orientation leaders are evaluated fairly in performance reviews.

The Remote Workplace Has Mixed Impacts on LGBTQ+ Inclusion

In a global study, McKinsey found that LGBTQ+ employees in the remote workplace were 1.4 times more likely (twice as likely in Asia) than straight and cis-gender peers to report acute challenges with workload increase and fair performance reviews. They struggled more from a loss of workplace connectivity and belonging. Two of three LGBTQ+ employees reported acute or moderate challenges with mental health. Additionally, a survey of remote workers in tech reported that online harassment and hostility went up for LGBTQ workers during the pandemic.

McKinsey researchers noted: “The allyship found in social and work settings is an important source of belonging among many in the LBGTQ+ community.”

On the other hand, some LGBTQ+ employees found remote work to be a ‘game changer for inclusion.’ With remote work, employees can remain in a place where they have a supportive community and work for an employer in a different location. Some find the remote office reduces the pressure of office interactions and helps avoid appearance-based comments. It also makes it straight-forward to introduce pronouns.

The Cost for Lacking LGBTQ+ Inclusion

It’s been estimated that the US economy could save $9 billion annually if organizations had more effective inclusion policies for LGBTQ+ employees.

A recent argument in Forbes demonstrated that a lack of LGBTQ+ inclusion is costing companies. If an LGBTQ+ employee – either out or closeted – spends even 15 minutes of their day either explaining or evading uncomfortable situations related to their identity, it amounts to 65 hours a year, or over $1500 per LGBTQ+ employee based on median income, to compensate for a workplace that isn’t LGBTQ+ inclusive: which sums to a quarter million for a company with 10,000 employees or $2 billion for U.S. employers, annually.

“Add it all up, and employers are wasting a huge amount of money by not creating spaces where LGBTQ+ folks can bring their whole selves to work, do their jobs and be successful,” writes Michael Bach.

Meanwhile, many studies confirm that when employees are within a genuinely inclusive organizational culture, it benefits individuals, teams, organizations and the bottom line.

LGBTQ+ Inclusion Is a Cultural Commitment

While Pride Month is a celebration that lasts for a month, a LGBTQ+ employee needs to feel included – and protected from homophobia and transphobia – every day, and regardless if they choose to share their identity in the workplace. Because LGBTQ+ individuals are less visible than other underrepresented groups, organizations must go the extra mile.

Inclusion is not performative but about mitigating biases, creating authentic belonging, valuing LGBTQ+ voices and providing equal opportunity to contribute and fulfill potential. When it comes to LGBTQ+ inclusion, dedicated corporations advocate for legislative change and oppose legislative discrimination.

At a DEI commitment level, LGBTQ+ inclusion must be a specific priority and companies must seek to understand how individuals who are LGBTQ+ experience the office differently to other groups. It means visible leadership commitment to inclusion and leadership representation, and activating sponsorship of LGBTQ+ talent.

At an advocacy level, it means leveraging the corporate voice to oppose discriminatory legislation that targets the LGBTQ+ community and even leading the charge as powerful allies on LGBTQ+ rights.

At a policy and processes level, inclusion means making sure policies are LGBTQ+ inclusive such as domestic-partner benefit and trans-inclusive healthcare coverage as well as clear about non-discrimination on gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation regardless of whether employees are “out”; mitigating assumptions and bias in hiring, reviews, pay and promotions; adapting technological interfaces to be inclusive (such as freedom to input chosen names in data fields); providing gender-neutral restrooms; and protecting employees from bullying whether in-office or online.

At the level of everyday cultural interactions, it means cultivating compassion and awareness among employees; using inclusive and gender-neutral language in the workplace; actively encouraging allyship, empowering better allyship and making allyship visible; investing in LGBTQ+ networks and rewarding contributions; setting aside safe spaces for voices to come forth; normalizing the adding of pronouns on LinkedIn and social media profiles; recognizing that identifies are fluent and complex and letting people tell you how they identify on their terms; celebrating LGBTQ+ calendar events and days; and most of all creating a culture of learning, openness and psychological safety.

It’s the organizations and leaders that champion not a month, but a sustained and iterative commitment to LGBTQ+ inclusion, that will make a real difference to LGBTQ+ lives.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

Op-ED: How to Navigate Your Career as a Working Mother in Technology

, ,

Working Mother In TechnologyNavigating one’s career as a working mother in technology is akin to holding a porcupine, while jumping through a ring of fire, and trying to put mascara on at the same time. It can be uncomfortable, it can make you feel hot, and we try to look our best while doing it all. In fact, our survey of over 300 mothers worldwide, published in our book Pressing ON As A Tech Mom: How Tech Industry Mothers Set Goals, Define Boundaries And Raise the Bar for Success, revealed that 34 percent felt that working in such a hectic, high-speed environment was incredibly tough and sometimes downright impossible. Being a woman in tech is challenging, but being a mother makes it even more so challenging.


With just 27 percent of female representation in the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) industries, women are underrepresented. Mothers who remain in these fields are even fewer, with 43 percent of women leaving full-time STEM employment after their first child (PNAS). Since women in tech studies report that $12 trillion could be added to global GDP by 2025 with a more gender-diverse workforce, where balanced contributions can lead to the creation of workplaces in which “employees feel safe to innovate, knowing that their unique experiences and contributions are valued” (JAB), there are compelling reasons for change.

As mothers in tech, what can we do to overcome the obstacles, and rise above to thrive in our careers, rather than only survive?

Here are three key steps to navigating motherhood and their STEM careers:
  • Squash Imposter Syndrome – When we believe that we are unworthy of the role that we are in or feel that we lack the skills to be successful, we often feel like imposters. According to Forbes, 75 percent of professional women report experiencing this unsavory feeling. When these thoughts and ideas enter our minds, we need to invoke a strategy to dismiss that negative feedback loop. Instead of telling yourself “I don’t know what I’m doing,” leverage positive self-talk and think about the skills that you are bringing to a role or situation. If you are a leader, be mindful about providing positive reinforcement for a job well done and enable an emotionally safe space where giving and receiving feedback is welcome.

 

  • Find A Mentor And A Sponsor – Mentorship and sponsorship are one of the most important ways to enable a woman to rise. Yet in our survey for our book, we found that just 41 percent of women ever had the benefit of these champion roles boosting their careers. Understanding the difference between the two is one place to start: A mentor is someone with whom you can brainstorm ideas based on shared values. A sponsor is someone who can influence decisions about your career and/or compensation. Note that your sponsor and mentor can be male or female so long as they are your true advocate, in tune with your accomplishments and career goals. A second step to take is to seek these crucial advocacy roles out by simply asking mentor and sponsor candidates. Most people are willing to help, which leads us to our third tip:

 

  • Lift Up Other Women – Live by the “golden rule” – treating other mothers in tech the way that you want to be treated. In past decades, women like my mom recount stories of women mistreating one another in favor of their own advancement (“To climb the corporate ladder, I needed to beat out the other women who were vying for the same limited roles.”).  While competition can be healthy, mindfully supporting one another is most important to nurture a balanced workplace where women can rise, and thrive, together. Lend a helping hand to a mother reintegrating into the workplace after parental leave. Invite another woman to join an important meeting as part of a career development initiative. Oblige when asked to serve as a sponsor and/or mentor for others.

By being confident, seeking out allyship, and practicing benevolence, mothers in technology have a greater chance of breaking down barriers and invoking change. With more mothers staying in technology, a more inclusive environment will emerge that sets the precedent for future generations. So, while the day-to-day routine of a working mom may feel like a circus act, continue to show up. Persist. Persevere. Your efforts are part of our movement to change the future for our daughters and their allies.

Other resources to nurture and inspire your journey that we often use include:
  • How Women Rise: Break the 12 Habits Holding You Back from Your Next Raise, Promotion, Or Job. In their book, Marshall Goldsmith and Sally Helgesen identify twelve habits that women typically have that limit their ability to grow professionally and ways to change those behaviors.
  • The Adventures of Women in Technology: How We Got Here And Why We Stay, by Alana Karen. Alana is Senior Software Engineer at Google, where she’s worked for over a decade. She has seen it all and remains loyal to her craft. Learn how she does it, and more importantly, why she is still in tech.
  • Nevertheless, She Persisted: True Stories of Women Leaders in Tech. This book by Pratima Rao Gluckman recounts the stories of hundreds of women leaders who faced adversity and hardship in their tech careers, yet managed to find success.

About:
Sabina M. Pons is a management consultant whose focus is on driving revenue protection and growth for technology companies. In her 20+ year career, she has led global corporate teams, managed multi-million-dollar P&Ls, and built teams from the ground up. Now, she serves as the Managing Director of the emerging management consulting company, Growth Molecules.

With a master’s degree in Communication, Leadership & Organizational Behavior from Gonzaga University and a bachelor’s degree in Communications from the University of Southern California, Sabina is passionate about igniting corporate transformational change. She also sits on several boards, participates in many mentorship programs, and recently obtained a First-Degree Black Belt in Taekwondo. Sabina resides in Orange County in Southern California with her husband, two young children, and Goldendoodle dog, Riley. Pressing ON as a Tech Mom: How Tech Industry Mothers Set Goals, Define Boundaries & Raise the Bar for Success is Sabina’s first book.

/by

Avoid These Four Leadership Failures To Retain Employees Through The Great Resignation

, ,

Great ResignationFor more than a year, the employment world has experienced significant upheaval as millions of workers make a mass exodus from the traditional workplace: a phenomenon now commonly called ‘the Great Resignation’. Women leaders who recognize and avoid four common leadership failures in the workplace will be better placed to retain their best employees through these turbulent times.

World-wide, leaders are grappling to understand what is fueling ‘the Great Resignation’. Also known as ‘the Big Quit’ and ‘the Great Reshuffle’, this is an ongoing economic trend in which employees have voluntarily resigned from their jobs en masse since early 2021, primarily in the US.

Research into this phenomenon that is wreaking havoc in the employment world suggests that many people are rethinking their careers, seeking a better work-life balance, facing up to long-endured job dissatisfaction, and preferring the flexibility of remote work.

As ‘the Great Resignation’ unfolds, there has never been a more important time for business leaders to think smart to ensure their work environment appeals to the post-Covid generation of workers.

Here are the four fundamental leadership failures that drive good employees away. Recognizing and rectifying these leadership failures will provide women leaders with an edge to help them retain good employees amid a mass exodus.

Rectifying leadership failure 1: Treating employees as the primary customers

The first crucial leadership failure is not recognizing that the employee is actually the primary customer.

Employees are initially drawn to work for a company because of various reasons, such as the company’s reputation. Ultimately, however, good employees stick around because of how well a company looks after them.

 Employees should therefore be treated as the primary customer. This means that each employee should be treated, cared for, managed, and responded to in a way that is consistent with how the company wants its customers to be treated.

Not only does it set a good example to manage employees this way, but it also increases one of the most important assets of any company: credibility, and the trust it brings. Employees want to work with and for a company that they can trust.

Rectifying leadership failure 2 – Recognizing leadership is not management

Another crucial leadership failure is not recognizing the difference between leadership and management.

Most companies have a management culture, which is not the same as proper leadership. Management is important and is a part of leadership responsibility. Managers have to make people follow, but leaders make people want to follow. Managers bring about compliance, but what leaders are able to create is buy-in, and this increases the likelihood of employees bringing their best self to work.

Recognizing the difference between management and leadership not only increases the likelihood of recruiting and retaining good employees, it also increases the chances of having a team that gives their best effort and go beyond the regular call of duty.

Rectifying leadership failure 3 – Realizing valued compensation is not just financial

The failure to recognize that finances are not the only form of valued compensation is a third common leadership failure today.

This is a recent development and is clear when considering the work patterns of the Millennium generation. This is the first generation in some time that does not out earn the previous generation. And it’s not because this generation is not capable or competent, but rather because they value some things more than money, such as flexibility, being part of something bigger or being valued as individuals.

Whereas paying employees so well that they tolerate toxicity in their working environment – often called ‘golden handcuffs’ – may have worked in the past, but will not work in the future.

Rectifying leadership failure 4 – Recognizing that EQ is the IQ multiplier

Last, but certainly not least, is the leadership failure of not recognizing that EQ (Emotional Intelligence) is the IQ (Intelligence Quotient) multiplier, especially now during ‘the Great Resignation’. 

It’s not that employees are avoiding work, or that they prefer to stay at home, but rather that many have had a glimpse of what it’s like to work in peace and don’t want to return to a toxic work culture.

For this reason, building Emotional Intelligence is a core leadership competency. Fortunately, building EQ is possible, and requires attention to each of the four qualities of EQ, briefly described below.


The four qualities of EQ
  1. Self-awareness, referring to how well you are aware of yourself as a leader.
  2. Self-management, which is the ability to manage yourself based on what you know about yourself.
  3. Social awareness, or the ability to discern the difference in others’ relationship management approaches.
  4. Relationship management, which is determining how different people communicate, comprehend and are motivated, and the ability to lead and respond accordingly.

In a post-COVID work world, dominated by ‘the Big Resignation”, being an emotionally intelligent leader – able to manage yourself and others – is key and critical to recruiting and keeping good employees.

By: Dr. Dharius Daniels is an emotional intelligence expert, author of Relational Intelligence: The People Skills You Need For The Life Of Purpose You Want, and former professor at Princeton University.

/by