Tag Archive for: career advice

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

7 Voices That Weaken Women’s Leadership

,

Barbara is in her late twenties and speaks with a relentlesslProfessional Womeny cheerful voice that can get on people’s nerves. She is always smiling, happy, and eager—and sounds as though she’s ten yours younger than she really is.

Our instructor asks her whether she used another voice during any time in her life. At first, she replies, “Oh no, this is the way I’ve always spoken.” Then upon reflection, she blurts out. “Oh my goodness—I remember now! I used to have a completely different voice when I was head of my debating society at university! . . . . It was way, way lower. People would say I was one of the best debaters they’d heard.””

“So what happened,” our instructor asked.

“Ever since I started working for my boss—six years ago when I was straight out of university—he’s asked me to smile. Every morning during those first few months I reported to him, he’d walk up to my desk and say, ‘Where’s that smile?’ Sometimes he’d say it twice or three times in one day. I guess that made my voice cheery and nice sounding.”

This story says a lot about our voice—and how it is shaped by external realities. Finding your true leadership voice often requires getting rid of vocal patterns we have acquired in our past. Do you have any of the “voices” described below that can undercut your leadership?

Our Many Voices

The little girl voice. This high-pitched, thin, and wispy tone makes the speaker sound younger and less confident than she really is. Often the little girl voice is accompanied by lifting the voice at the end of sentences as though asking a question, rather than making a statement. People won’t take you seriously if you sound 10 years old.

The cheerleader voice. This hyped up voice makes the speaker sound weak because she is trying so hard. The cheerleader pulls out all the stops, pushes her voice into the higher registers, picks up her pace, smiles a lot, and uses lots of fly-away energy. This voice lacks the gravitas and grounded commitment of a leader.

The maternal voice. This voice can be either loud and controlling or quietly domineering. A client came to us for coaching because she whispered when she spoke. She had worked as a kindergarten teacher and learned to get children’s attention with a quiet maternal voice. The problem is that people have to lean in to hear her speak, and her voice sounds manipulative to a business audience.

The helpful voice. This voice positions the speaker as a subordinate. A woman in one of our courses was the sort of person who could probably run a company. But her voice made her sound much lower in rank than she was. The helpful voice is submissive and always obliging. It turned out that she had begun her work life in a secretarial position; her voice got “stuck” in that lower role and never matured.

The girlfriend voice. This is a sweet, coy voice that may get attention in the office, but for the wrong reasons. It’s the vocal equivalent of short skirts and cleavage. It may have its side benefits, but it doesn’t work for someone who is career focused. This is not uncommon even among women who have no hidden agenda.

The nice voice. This is one of the more common voices women use because girls are raised to be “nice.” Unfortunately “nice” lacks power. In fact, being nice in the board room, conveys the impression that you are trying to make others feel good—thereby putting them in the power position and belittling your leadership.

The grateful voice. This tone can suggest that a woman feels she doesn’t deserve to be heard. One woman explained, “That gratefulness suggests we are not comfortable being at the table, and indicates we’re not as invested as other participants present.”

The manly voice. This is less common today than it once was, when women took on the male style to fit into a male-dominated work environment. This voice is low, often aggressive, and shows little or no warmth. In the movie, The Devil Wears Prada, Meryl Streep plays an executive who adopts those tones.

If you identify with one of these voices, consider whether it serves you well as a leader. These voices play to a different audience and reflect a different time or role in our lives. It’s important to leave them behind if you want to sound like a leader.

What can you replace them with? A voice that is grounded and assertive without any of the overtones mentioned above. A leader’s voice is true to the thoughts being delivered—it has no other agenda. So connect your voice to the words you are delivering. Speak with conviction and power and depth. This will make all the difference in how your audience perceives you.

Guest Contributed by Judith Humphrey

Guest advice and opinions are not necessarily those of theglasshammer.com

/by

Moving On Up

,

bottom lineSomeone once asked me if I felt I had to work harder than my male peers in order to succeed. While I won’t argue that a lot of hard work went into getting to where I am now, I attribute my success to a more strategic reason – working smarter.

Although Satya Nadella, Microsoft’s CEO, is credited with the “keep your nose to the grindstone and good things will come your way” school of thought, this skewed belief is a lot more prevalent than we would like to believe. Perhaps the most important outcome to these foot-in-mouth moments, besides sending the culprit on a heartfelt public mea culpa, is to start a conversation on the issues women still face in the workforce. Let’s face it, gender inequity is alive and well in America.

But this is a complicated issue borne from deeply ingrained biases on both sides of the table. Biases for which we are often unaware. Accepting this as a fact of life provides leverage to females who seek to move up the corporate ladder. Knowing what we are up against provides us the ability to strategize a plan. By the way, women are not immune to biases and accepting this as another fact of life provides the opportunity for us to overcome the filters within us.

For years, my career was on the fast-track. I had consistently proven my technical abilities and was convinced that my hard work would suffice in getting me noticed as I approached upper management levels. My naiveté anchored me and it was not long before I found myself on an extended professional plateau. I watched helplessly as others raced up the corporate ladder while my career played in slow motion speed. When I inquired as to the reasons for the stall, the responses were without substance. “You’re on the cusp,” was a recurring theme conjuring vivid images of a barren and abandoned promontory where I watched the action from afar and from which I was unable to escape.

I needed to do something although it was unclear as to what exactly. But what was clear was that I was awakening from a fairy tale in which the heroine gets the prize through hard work alone. I’d like to say that I had a clearly defined plan but I would be lying. Instead, it was more desperation leading to motivation. Perhaps that is exactly the recipe for success. My leadership skills were suddenly put to the test in real time and I armed myself with courage as I took action. In retrospect, my experiences can be rolled up nicely into 3 steps that ultimately led to jump start my career.

1. Believe in yourself!

If you don’t believe in yourself, you’ve already lost the battle. This will be the single most important thing that will get you through any setback and help you up when you stumble. Self-doubt reflects like a neon sign. No one will take you seriously if you lack confidence. Most importantly, remain true to yourself. Never allow anyone to push you past that imaginary line in the sand beyond which you lose sight of yourself.

2. Be bold!

Mr. Nadella is just plain wrong. His advice has never been applicable in any era. Competition is fierce. Men are constantly seeking ways to stand out from the pack. Why would things be any different for women? Get your nose out of the grindstone and take risks. Leap outside your comfort zone and ask for those challenging assignments. Better yet, demand them. Have the courage to risk failure as it will only lead to growth and that gets you further along than through inaction.

3. Be discoverable!

Make your presence known. Women feel uncomfortable in touting our accomplishments and owning our success. This is our issue and we must overcome it. We risk having others see right through us when we sit quietly in the sidelines. Leadership is all about speaking out so let’s get used to it. Yes, go ahead and sit at the table, lean in, raise your hand, and never be afraid to proclaim “Enough!”

These are exciting times where change is in the air. But it takes all of us, collectively and individually, to achieve true gender balanced leadership. So believe in yourself, be bold, be discoverable, and never give up!

Each one of us has an imaginary line in the sand that we refuse to cross and I felt that I had allowed myself to be nudged over my threshold.

It is only in hindsight that I am able to share my lessons learned.

By Rossana G. D’Antonio, PE, GE

/by

Father’s Day: New Dads, Paternity Leave and Gender Equality

,

Father and son featuredAs Father’s Day approaches, we reflect on a hot topic that is helping to drive gender equality in Europe and beyond: paternity leave and shared parental leave.

The USA is miles away from the starting line on this matter. 182 countries provide paid maternity leave (the USA sits beside Oman and Papua New Guinea as sole exceptions) and 70 countries provide paid paternity leave. The USA is the only industrialized country that does not mandate some kind of paid parental leave to be provided by employers, only three states (California, Rhode Island, and New Jersey) offer paid leave for both parents, and companies offering paid maternity and paternity leave dropped from 17% in 2010 to 12% in 2014.

At the same time, research shows that paid maternity leave and breastfeeding breaks would help women to advance further in their careers by keeping them integrated in the workforce. But what could really change the game for women, men, families, and gender equality – and have positive growth implications for the GDP – is not just paid maternity leave that still regards mothers as the primary caretakers, but paid parental leave that reflects and encourages true co-parenting.

Newborn Shared Parental Leave in the UK

Only half a dozen countries offer men more than two weeks paternity leave, and the UK has just become one of them by introducing shared parental leave. The Telegraph has called it, “the most progressive new parent support policy that Britain has ever had.”

Before mothers had 52 weeks and fathers had two paid weeks. The new UK policy allows that after the initial two weeks of compulsory maternal leave, 50 weeks of shared parental leave and 37 weeks of pay can be divided up between couples (including adopting & same sex) anyway they chose: taking at the same time, in rotation, and/or in three separate blocks of time each.

The policy is not without bumps. One key issue is it doesn’t add actual weeks off work for families on top of what mothers already received. Jeremy Davies, head of communications at The Fatherhood Institute told The Guardian, “Although it’s called shared parental leave it’s really transferable maternity leave. It doesn’t give fathers any independent right or responsibility for taking time off, and it doesn’t fundamentally challenge employers’ attitudes.”

Other issuesinclude low financial viability for many couples due to reduced pay, whether high-earning women will feel more pressure to get back to work sooner, and whether the policy will result in reduced breastfeeding rates. Good questions, important choices. But now at least the choice is increasingly for individual couples to make based on their needs.

It may be an imperfect step in the right direction, but then children don’t walk in one day either.

Established Shared Parental Leave in Sweden

While news to the UK, in Sweden gender-neutral parental leave is 40 years in the making.

In 2014, Sweden ranked fourth in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index, following Iceland, Finland and Norway. The higher the rank, the greater gender equality as measured by “the relative gaps between women and men across four key areas: health, education, economy, and politics”, regardless of the absolute level of resources. The UK and the USA rank in the twenties.

According to The Economist, almost 90% of new Swedish fathers take paternity leave, and last year340,000 dads took an average of seven weeks each. It began 40 years ago as six months of paternity leave per child at 90% pay to be shared as couples wished. Dads didn’t even take one percent of it. Today, they take 25% of what has expanded to 16 months of shared paid paternal leave. Although paternal leave is flexible between parents, Sweden is upping the paid use-it-or-lose-it-father-only portion from two to three months in an effort towards increasing gender equality.

Parental Leave – It’s Good for Everyone

Research has shown that it’s taboo to many men to even admit they’d like to modify their work schedule to take time at home. Yet over 99% of men in a survey of over 1,000 fathers felt employers should offer paid paternity leave. Even taking just two weeks parental leave in countries such as the USA, Britain, Australia, and Denmark has shown to make positive differences for the whole family.

More Balanced Family Gender Dynamics

As Liza Mundy writes in the The Atlantic, “The genius of paternity leave is that it shapes domestic and parenting habits as they are forming.” When both partners take paternal leave, it sets up the couple up to establish a more gender-neutral pattern where work, household, and family responsibilities are more evenly shared in a two-income household.

According to Mundy, paternity leave has been shown to “boost male participation in the household, enhance female participation in the labor force, and promote gender equity in both domains.”

Dads who take paternity leave are likely to remain more involved in child-care (feeding, bathing, playing, reading) many months after the leave period, compared to fathers who did not. There’s also evidence that being able to take paternity leave helps increase men’s confidence as parents, and they end up being “more competent and committed fathers whose greater involvement persists as their children grow up.”

Children benefit too. Research by the University of Oslo has shown that children’s learning development benefits when dads can take paternity leave – finding that children’s performance at secondary school improved when fathers had taken more time off early on, especially daughters.

More Balanced Workplace Gender Dynamics

More countries are considering that paternity leave is key for improving women’s career prospects, helping them to be seen more equally within, and stay connected to, the workforce.

Mundy, director of the Breadwinning & Caregiving Program at New America, writes that paternal leave keeps women from being singled out as prospective parents in the office, which can hold back their advancement in insidious ways. “If everybody—male or female—is asking for leave or taking leave that they already qualify for, I think it just levels the playing field for how men or women are looked at in the office.”

Because women’s childbearing years coincide with their peak earning years, encouraging paid paternity leave can help narrow the wage gap too. A Swedish study found that a women’s future earnings increased by 7% for every month her partner took parental leave. According to The Economist, greater uptake of parental leave by fathers in Sweden has been associated with higher levels of self-reported happiness in women and higher incomes.

In a survey of over 250 California firms, 90% of firms said that paid paternal leave had a positive or neutral impact on productivity, performance, and profitability, with minimal impact on operations and finances. Tech companies in the USA who pro-actively employ paid maternity and paternity policies are starting to recognize that the long-term benefits in retention and attracting talent are good for both families and business.

As we celebrate Father’s Day, let’s remember that gender equality is not only about promoting women’s equality in the workplace. It’s also about promoting men’s equality in the home and family.

Parental leave holds the potential to offer a big step forward for both.

/by

Both Gender and Personality Play Into Perceptions of Transformative Leadership, and It Seems Women Have a Slight Edge

,

female leaderIs how you’re seen as a team leader impacted by your personality or the fact that you’re a woman? New research helps to understand how both interact when it comes to being perceived as a transformational leader by team members.

According to Finnish researchers Brandt and Edinger, who recently published their findings from an academic setting across 14 years in Gender in Management: An International Journal, sex does indeed matter in leading project teams: “Women tend to be more transformational team leaders than men.”

Five Practices of Transformational Leaders

Transformational leaders have been defined as people who are recognized as “change agents who are good role models, who can create and articulate a clear vision for an organization, who empower followers to meet higher standards, who act in ways that make others want to trust them, and who give meaning to organizational life.”

According to Kouzes and Posner and their book The Leadership Challenge, transformational leadership is based upon “The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership” model, measured by the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI).

  • Challenging the Process (Challenging) – such as changing status quo, innovating, risk-taking
  • Inspiring a Shared Vision (Visioning) – such as passionately envisioning a future & enlisting others in common values & vision
  • Enabling others to Act (Enabling) – such as fostering collaboration & trust & strengthening others
  • Modelling the Way (Modelling) – such as leading by example & within organizational values in pursuing goals
  • Encouraging the Heart (Rewarding) – such as sharing in rewards and recognition, celebrating accomplishments

Brandt and Edinger indicate that transformational leadership has been connected in previous research with leadership effectiveness, job satisfaction, and higher motivation; and can enhance team learning, team member empowerment, group cohesiveness, and team performance.

Being Perceived as a Transformational Leader

Researchers Brandt and Edinger studied how personality type (as indicated by Myers Briggs) interacts with sex in impacting how members rate a leader’s transformational leadership capabilities within a team context. Measured within six-week project teams in an academic setting, Visioning was deemed less relevant and removed.

The widely-used MBTI measures personality preferences as: extroversion/ introversion; sensing/ intuition; thinking/ feeling; and judging/ perceiving. With the slight exception of thinking/feeling, personality types have been found to be distributed fairly evenly between the sexes.

Gender: Women Are More Transformational

In general, consistent with other meta-analysis studies, but not every single study, the researchers found women leaders received higher ratings in overall transformational leadership – especially in the behaviors of Modelling, Enabling, and Rewarding.

Women were more likely to practice leading by example, fostering collaboration and strengthening others, and celebrating and recognizing the accomplishments of team members as goals are achieved.

Indeed a 2014 Ketchum global survey ranked “leading by example” as the number one attribute important to great leadership, with 57% of people rating women as outperforming men at this trait, as well as 4 other top attributes including “bringing out the best in others.”

Broadly on gender, previous research by Brandt & Laiho, collecting data from 459 leaders and their subordinates across a 14 year period in different industries, investigated whether men and women with similar personalities act differently. Consistent with social role theory, they found that regardless of personality, women were more Enabling whereas men were more Challenging, rated both by themselves and those reporting to them.

Personality: Extraverted Personalities Are More Transformational

Personality influenced leadership perception for both sexes. Brandt & Edinger found that regardless of sex, “extraverted and judging personality types are more transformational leaders than introverted and perceiving ones.”

Extraverted team leaders were rated more Modelling of behavior, Rewarding of accomplishments, and Challenging of status quo than introverted team leaders. The researchers speculate extraverts may have more ease in stepping into short-term project leading roles, and also have a tendency to focus more on other people and give more positive feedback whereas introverts tend to focus and less on feedback, as they often require less themselves.

Previous research by Brandt & Laiho also confirmed extraverted female leaders were seen as more transformational and rewarding than intraverted ones.

Gender & Personality: Gender Impacts How Personality is Perceived

According to Brandt, “some personality types behave in the same way as a leader despite the gender, whereas some personalities act differently.” This also goes for how they’re perceived. In some cases, men and women with similar personality preferences are viewed differently by their team members as well as subordinates.

Among extravert team leaders, women were rated as more Modelling & Rewarding-oriented than their male counterparts, and so overall more transformational.

Being inclined away from extraversion seemed to penalize men more than women. The research found “introverted, sensing, thinking and perceiving female leaders are regarded as more transformational than men with similar preferences.”

The previous research by Brandt & Laiho also showed many areas in which women were rated as more transformational than men with similar personality preferences. They found, “Intuitive women were more Rewarding and scored higher on overall transformational profile than intuitive men. Thinking women were regarded as being more Enabling than thinking men, and finally, judging women were seen as more Enabling and transformational overall than judging men.”

The research also found that how leaders perceive their behavior (self-appraisal) does not always match up with how those they are leading rate it (appraisal). For example, feeling female female leaders evaluated themselves as more Enabling, but subordinates rated thinking female leaders to be more so.

Addressing Your Transformational Leadership Gaps

While the research in many ways indicates a gender advantage for women when it comes to transformational leadership which is worth taking note of, that’s also a dangerous game to rely on, as it keeps us in the realm of gender expectations and it hasn’t yet played out in outcome when looking at company profiles.

Social awareness in leadership “calls for a heightened sensitivity to how one’s behavior, in words and deeds, impacts others.” For this reason, insight into how your gender and personality combine to play into leadership perception matters.

Perception is ultimately perhaps most interesting as an input into helping chart your own leadership development. One take-away for female leaders is an opportunity to experiment with your behavior, no matter your personality, to grow in action and hence identity as a transformational leader.

For example, based on these findings women leaders who are more introverted might be advised to try out more extroverted behaviors – even if less comfortable – such as visibly giving positive feedback, outwardly rewarding accomplishments, and being visible in how you model the values you espouse.

The researchers suggest that all leaders can benefit by enhancing their self-knowledge: “When leaders know how they are perceived by others, they can address their weaknesses and maximize their strengths.”

/by

Office Housework: Lean In, But Don’t Be Leaned On

,

working from homeIf you make well-meaning, generous, happy to help contributions day in and out at the office and it goes without recognition or reward, do you make a sound? When it comes to your career, probably not. The truth is when it comes to both moving up and looking after yourself, too much helping might be hurting.

In a recent New York Times article, Sheryl Sandberg and Adam Grant write, “This is the sad reality in workplaces around the world: Women help more but benefit less from it.” After all, there’s a difference between leaning in and being leaned on.

Why We Help

Sandberg and Grant are quick to note that gender stereotypes are at play in creating expectations for women to “pitch in” thanklessly for the team: “When a man offers to help, we shower him with praise and rewards. But when a woman helps, we feel less indebted. She’s communal, right? She wants to be a team player. The reverse is also true. When a woman declines to help a colleague, people like her less and her career suffers. But when a man says no, he faces no backlash. A man who doesn’t help is ‘busy’; a woman is ‘selfish.’”

So it’s no surprise that Law Professor Joan C. Williams, author of What Works for Women at Work: Four Patterns Working Women Need to Know, says that for women, “Saying no without seeming touchy, humorless or supremely selfish is a particularly tricky balancing act.” Women continue to be left “holding the mop”, in the words of Senator Elizabeth Warren, for men in the office. Blogging on leadership, Williams defines office housework as:

“the administrative tasks, menial jobs, and undervalued assignments women are disproportionately given at their jobs.”

“Someone has to take notes, serve on committees and plan meetings — and just as happens with housework at home, that someone is usually a woman,” says Sandberg and Grant.

What happens when a woman says no? A study on altruistic behavior led by NYU’s Heilman tested how male and female employees would be evaluated based on choosing whether to stay late for an important meeting. A man was rated 14% more favourably than a woman for staying and helping. A woman was 12% more negatively than a man for declining.

It’s the equivalent of the “awww” factor daddy gets but not mom when he carries around the baby, and it’s unequally rewarded. Sandberg and Grant state, “Over and over, after giving identical help, a man was significantly more likely to be recommended for promotions, important projects, raises and bonuses. A woman had to help just to get the same rating as a man who didn’t help.”

If you’re finding yourself disproportionately engaged in leading mentor programs, coordinating the interns, taking notes, heading up thankless committees and special side initiatives, ordering the sandwiches, volunteering to stay late, and spending time behind the scenes coaching, you are helping organizational success according to many studies noted in the NYT article.

But the question is at what price to your career and to yourself?

Hindering Your Career

The NYT article stated, “Studies demonstrate that men are more likely to contribute with visible behaviors — like showing up at optional meetings — while women engage more privately in time-consuming activities like assisting others and mentoring colleagues.”

Behind the scenes help is valuable, but when it’s mostly women who are carrying the time and effort commitment on low-valued, low-visibility work, who is free to step up to the high-value, high-visibility opportunities?

“The person taking diligent notes in the meeting almost never makes the killer point,” Sandberg and Grant write in the NYT. And Williams asserts in the Washington Post, “We have to get women out of office housework and onto more projects that really matter, both to them and to their companies, if we want more women to be successful in reaching positions of influence.”

Sacrificing Yourself

Williams writes, “Women are often asked to play the selfless good citizen…by taking on assignments that men don’t want or that the organization doesn’t highly reward.” But what happens when women act selfless, or out of our need to be dutiful or helpful, is we too often neglect ourselves.

Women are more likely to feel burned out at work when it comes to emotional exhaustion, according to an analysis of 183 different studies across 15 countries. According to another study, women’s focus on and involvement with others to the exclusion of taking care of their own self can cause stress and depression underneath.

Being helpful can create personally rewarding interactions, but women need to be careful that they’re not exhausting their own energy and resources while colluding with multiplying expectations upon themselves.

If your identity becomes locked up in being the helpful one, which your gender already infers, then it becomes an expectation you serve and reaffirm. When out of balance, being of service to others at the workplace can mean being of dis-service to yourself.

A Mindset Change

Sandberg and Grant suggest that organizations should chose to value, track, and recognize acts of helping, as well as address the imbalance in assigning this work. They also suggest men could step up to contribute their share and help vocalize the unsung contributions.

In the meantime, they suggest breaking free of the cycle of mop-holding comes down to women, to you: “For women, the most important change starts with a shift in mind-set: If we want to care for others, we also need to take care of ourselves. One of us, Adam, has conducted and reviewed numerous studies showing that women (and men) achieve the highest performance and experience the lowest burnout when they prioritize their own needs along with the needs of others. By putting self-concern on par with concern for others, women may feel less altruistic, but they’re able to gain more influence and sustain more energy. Ultimately, they can actually give more.”

The NYT article pointed out an exec who found more efficient ways – such as a FAQ manual – to address requests for help, as well as caring ways to decline over-stretching. Only then did she make partner. You can be as giving, caring, and considerate in how you say no to others while recognizing your needs and limits as you can be in saying yes.

Women are quick at helping, and it’s part of the path to success, but that doesn’t mean we have to shoulder all the under-valued work at a cost to ourselves.

Perhaps we need to qualify Sandberg’s call-to-action: Lean in, but don’t be leaned on.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

The Formula for Selling Anybody, Anything, Anytime

,

women salesHere’s the thing: sometimes we’re selling our ideas, sometimes we’re selling our products and, these days, many of us are selling ourselves as the best candidate for the job/as the person who deserves a promotion. With this in mind, here’s the proven formula for selling your best self to anybody, anywhere, anytime.

First: Yale University did a study of the 12 most persuasive words in the English language. What they discovered is that the most persuasive word in the English language is “you.” Consequently, I recommend throwing it around a lot: “As I’m sure you know,” “As I’m sure you’ve heard,” “I wanted to talk to you today,” etc.

Second: California-based Social Psychologist Ellen Langer revealed that there is one word in the English language that increases the possibility of cooperation from 60 to 94%. No, that is not a typo. I will repeat: 60 to 94%. This word is “Because.”

Lastly: “The Duncan Hines Cake Mix Marketing Theory.” When Duncan Hines first began making cake mix, the decision to have you at home add the egg was made in the marketing department. Why is this effective? Because they realized that when we add the egg we feel proud because we contributed; we can say, “I baked!” How does this work in a business scenario? You need to articulate how you can contribute to the other person’s success and/or how they can contribute to yours so that what is created becomes your shared success.

So that’s your formula: you + because + the egg = success.

Following are three different ways you can apply this formula for success

Talking to an Interviewer:

Too often we spend our interviewing time talking about why we are right for the job. This sounds a lot like, “And I just think this company would be perfect for me/would help me meet my goals.” No. What you need to be talking about is how you are going to contribute to your future boss’s/the company’s success once you are hired.

What might this sound like?

“I wanted to talk to you today because your job description/your company’s mission statement/your bestselling product is X, and my skill set/my personal passion/my sales experience is in Y. Applying the full force of my expertise to this job will enable us both to reach our goals.”

Talking to Your Boss about a Brewing “Situation”:

The use of the word “situation” here is quite deliberate. The White House doesn’t have a “Crisis Room,” they have a “Situation Room.” Likewise, you don’t have a crisis– you have a situation that needs to be resolved.

So, what would the formula for success sound like here?

“I wanted to bring a potential situation to your attention immediately because it requires expert attention. X has occurred and I have come up with the following two, possible solutions. Is there one that you prefer?”

In this instance, their egg is not as much the mention of their expert attention, but the opportunity you are giving them to apply that expertise to two possible resolution strategies. Having them to choose which they prefer (and tell you why it’s far better) not only allows them to add their egg, but to choose the temperature at which the solution is “baked.”

Talking to a Potential Target at a Networking event

Too many networking events are about what others can do for us, rather than what we can do for them. In my experience, however, the most successful networkers aren’t asking, “What can you do for me?” but “What can I do for you?” In this scenario, then, the formula would likely sound like this:

“Hello, I’m X,” (if your target is standing with another person, or in a group, introduce yourself to everyone present.) “I wanted to introduce myself because I know you are the visionary behind X idea/product/company, and I wanted to introduce you to Y/write about you in my newsletter/ask if I could help you organize your next charity event.”

As you can see, the offer doesn’t need to be huge — the fact that you made it at all is what helps you stand out. Leaving room for them to add the egg of their choice is what will ensure your successful connection.

Happy baking!

Guest Contribution by Frances Cole Jones

Guest advice and opinions are not necessarily those of theglasshammer.com

/by

Accountability, Leadership Responsibility, and Common Sense: Leaders Share What Makes Diversity Initiatives Work

,

Professional WomenGender diversity and inclusion doesn’t just happen, as Catalyst shows every year at its awards conference. A sustained improvement in the percentage of women in corporate workforces and leadership comes from hard work by companies to achieve and maintain set goals. It also requires a visibly demonstrated commitment to diversity by those in charge.

Honorees at this year’s Catalyst Awards Conference shared their companies’ secrets to success in increasing the percentage of women in leadership levels and throughout their companies’ workforces. The winning programs at Chevron Corporation and Proctor & Gamble combined three tried and true ingredients for advancing women at work: accountability, common sense, and leaders who took personal responsibility for improving diversity and inclusion at their companies.

“How we are behaving in any interaction speaks louder than any company effort,” said Melody Boone Meyer, president of Chevron Asia Pacific Exploration and Production Company. “Your behavior is how people read what’s real or not. The communication is there, but much more important is whether you’re living that.”

“Your behavior is how people read what’s real or not. The communication is there, but much more important is whether you’re living that.”

At the conference in March, Meyer, along with Mike Wirth, executive vice president of downstream and chemicals at Chevron; William P. Gipson, chief diversity officer and senior vice president of research and development at Proctor & Gamble; and Colleen Jay, president of global hair care and color at Proctor & Gamble, took to the stage to describe not only how their companies changed their approach to improving gender diversity, but also their personal journeys with taking responsibility for diversity as well.

As Meyer said, “Leaders need to live it.”

Accountability

Leaders from both companies detailed how they were held accountable for meeting corporate gender diversity goals.

Wirth explained that, at Chevron, leaders have to answer for their diversity action plans as part of their performance reviews. He also described an exercise the company’s CEO had leaders undertake: “The CEO said I want you to go out and spend time with three people who are very different from you and I expect you to respond,” he recalled.

“Accountability is nothing unless you have goals,” Gipson agreed. “Targets change everything.”

Proctor & Gamble ties diversity goals to executives’ stock options, he said. But the goals aren’t easy to meet and they aren’t merely window dressing to placate investors who care about diversity – they’re stretch goals.

“To really move the needle, you need to have some stretching,” Gipson said.

Indeed, Wirth commented, Chevron even employed reverse inventives at one point. “If you didn’t make progress, the bonus would be affected for everyone in that group,” he said, explaining that Chevron’s leaders wanted to make sure executives understood that diversity was a shared responsibility.

Common Sense

Diversity initiatives wouldn’t work without a heavy dose of common sense, as well. For example, Gipson explained that a few years ago, leaders at Proctor & Gamble realized women were leaving the company at a disproportionate rate. The company undertook a workforce survey to figure out why.

One of the reasons, P&G discovered, was that the company’s flex work program just wasn’t working. Offering employees the ability to work flexibly is one way companies can help their entire workforce meet their personal responsibilities. Since women as a group bear the brunt of child- and elder-care disproportionately compared to men, flex programs have been identified as a way for companies to retain female employees.

It turned out, Gipson said, that P&G’s flexible work program wasn’t flexible enough.

“We were trying to mandate when and where to work flexibly, but life is not really that way,” he explained. The company amended its program based on the survey results.

Leadership Responsibility

Finally, the panelists described what is possibly the most important part of an effective gender diversity initiative. Leaders have to internalize the value of diversity and demonstrate that value in their personal actions.

For example, Johnson said she and other P&G executives help each other keep track of blind spots.

“We help keep everyone sharp so we can role model that going forward,” she explained.

Similarly, Wirth described how he had to face his own personal blind spots a few years ago when Chevron undertook a dramatic restructuring. He picked all white men to lead his new team.

“I got a lot of feedback from the CEO, my kids, and women in my organization,” he said. “I had to do a lot of reflection on myself. I genuinely believed I had the right beliefs and behavior, but that’s not good enough. People need to see action.”

“I got a lot of feedback from the CEO, my kids, and women in my organization,”

He continued, “As a white male, I’ve got an extra responsibility to catalyze the discussion [on diversity], and create an environment where everyone is supported and everyone understands the expectations.”

Gipson described how, as an R&D executive, he had to learn to “embrace the soft stuff.”

“It’s the hardest stuff,” he said. “But no matter how much progress we’ve made, we can always get better.”

That attitude – that we can always get better – is an important one in diversity and inclusion. Simply meeting the numbers isn’t good enough. True inclusion will require everyone in the workforce – especially leaders – to keep pushing themselves harder to identify and change their own personal weaknesses when it comes to diversity and working to change their companies for the better.

By Melissa J. Anderson (New York City)

/by

Listening Is Getting Harder, but It’s Necessary for Leaders

,

women in technologyEvolving digital technology demands more communication and accessibility from all employees, which leads to a culture of multi-tasking. But as leaders face increased communication demands, it’s important that they retain the value of listening.

Listening is Getting More Difficult

Active listening has been identified as one of the ten attributes of embodied leadership. Effective listening by leaders has been noted as the first step in creating trust within organizations. Also research shows that supervisor listening contributes to employee job satisfaction, satisfaction with the supervisor, and fosters a strong and beneficial exchange between leaders and team members.

Yet according to Accenture’s #ListenLearnLead study of 3,600 business professionals across 30 countries, the vast majority of professionals (64%) feel that listening has become more difficult in today’s workplace.

While nearly all (96%) of global professionals judged themselves to be “good listeners”, nearly all (98%) also report multi-tasking at least part of the day.

The study found that eight in ten respondents said they multi-task on conference calls with work emails (66%), instant messaging (35%), personal emails (34%), social media (22%) and reading news and entertainment (21%). In fact, professionals report distracted listening and divided attention unless they are held directly and visibly responsible within the context of the meeting.

“Digital is changing everything, including the ways in which we communicate. In turn, the way we communicate is changing how we listen, learn and lead in the workplace,” says Nellie Berroro, Managing Director, Global Inclusion & Diversity at Accenture. “Today, truly listening means not just watching our nonverbal cues in face-to-face meetings, but also maintaining our focus on conference calls, staying present, and resisting the urge to multi-task with instant messages and texts.”

Multi-Tasking Means More Quantity, But Less Quality

The attraction to multi-tasking seems to be a double-edged sword in the workplace that pins quantity against quality.

In Accenture’s study, 64% of Millennials, 54% of Gen Xers, and 49% of Baby Boomers reported multi-tasking during at least half of their work day. While 66% of professionals agreed multi-tasking enables them to get more done at work, 36% report that distractions prevent them from doing their best work. Millennials were at the extreme on each – feeling multi-tasking meant getting more done (73%) and yet distractions prevented them from doing their best work (41%).

However it’s traditional interruptions imposed by others (telephone calls & unscheduled meetings & visitors) rather than technology that were reported as most disruptive, perhaps due to the lack of control over these distractions.

What suffers? The trade-offs reported include decreased focus, lower-quality work, and diminished team relationships. But can leaders afford these trade-offs, too?

Despite the Benefits, Are Leaders Too Accessible?

“Our survey found technology both helps and hinders effective leadership,” says Borrero. On the positive side, 58% of survey respondents saw technology as a benefit for leaders enabling them to communicate quickly with their teams, allowing both time and geographic flexibility (47%) as well as accessibility (46%).

However, 62% of women and 54% of men felt technology made leaders over-stretched by being too accessible. 50% of respondents felt it forced multi-tasking and 40% felt it distracted from culture and relationship building. 55% felt a top challenge for leaders is information overload.

Borrero recommends practicing discipline when needed in disengaging from other technologies to give full focus to the material in front of you, such as putting your mobile device on silent during phone conferences and actively noting key points. “When you face information overload,” she says, “become comfortable with turning off technology. For example, you might disconnect at night, so you can recharge, and decide not to look at your phone until the morning.”

Importantly, when it comes to effective leadership and overcoming barriers to it, focusing on quality of communication and connection matters most – and that may very well start with listening.

The most important leadership attributes identified by the study were the “soft skills” of effective communication (55%), ability to manage change (47%), and ability to inspire others and ideas (45%), closely followed by understanding team members.

Yet this is also where skills suffer: the two most commonly perceived obstacles to effective team leadership were a lack of interpersonal skills (50%) and a lack of communication skills (44%).

Getting Better At Listening

While digital technology brings many advantages, leaders who compromise at listening may compromise their ability to lead effectively.

A Westminster Business School report highlights, “Listening is an essential skill in all situations and it is particularly important for leaders and managers to actually hear what others say, not simply what we think we hear them say…All great leadership starts with listening. That means listening with an open mind, heart and will. It means listening to what is being said as well as what isn’t being said.”

Despite its importance to leadership, leaders are too often ineffective at truly listening according to an HBR article by Christine M. Riordan. She notes, “The ability and willingness to listen with empathy is often what sets a leader apart.”

Riordan outlines three key behaviors leaders can practice that are linked with empathetic listening:

1) Hearing with all of your senses and acknowledging what you’ve heard.

This means “recognizing all verbal and nonverbal cues, including tone, facial expressions, and other body language.” It’s as much about listening to what is not said as what is said, and probing a bit deeper, as well as acknowledging others feelings or viewpoints and the act of sharing them.

2) Processing what is being shared and heard.

This means “understanding the meaning of the messages and keeping track of the (key) points of the conversation.” Effective leaders are able to capture and remember global themes, key messages, and points of agreement and disagreement.

3) Responding to and encouraging communication.

This means “assuring others that listening has occurred and encouraging communication to continue.” Acknowledging others verbally or non-verbally, asking clarifying questions, or paraphrasing reflects consideration of their input. This can also mean following-up to ensure others know listening has occurred.

According to Accenture’s Borrero, “Leaders are role models employees emulate, so it’s important for them to set a good example. In our increasingly hyper-connected digital workplace, we all need to practice ‘active listening,’ including paraphrasing, taking notes and asking questions. At Accenture, we offer a number of courses in effective listening, which is critical to our company as we focus on serving clients.”

In today’s leadership context, where effective leadership means showing social awareness not just self-awareness, leaders may employ technology to help them do it, but one way or another, it’s important they find a way to truly listen.

By Aimee Hansen

/by

The Way You’re Coping With Stress Is Making It Worse: What You Should Do Instead to Build Your Resiliency

,

women stressedOn a typical day, you’re most likely squeezing in three days worth of work. You have your scheduled work time consisting of meetings, servicing clients and customers, managing communications, and connecting with colleagues scattered around the globe. Your second workday consists of the one before, after and in-between. You get up early to get a jump on emails, you stay late to get work done, and you multitask during the day in an attempt to be as productive as possible. Your third workday begins when you leave the office. You have to pick up food for dinner on the way home, perhaps get the kids to practice, run a load of laundry and make sure the house hasn’t fallen apart. Before you go to bed you see the opportunity to get on your computer to get more work done. No wonder you’re completely stressed and exhausted by the end of the day!

You just need to find better ways to reduce or manage your stress, right? Wrong. Unfortunately, there’s no way to reduce your stress. Your job is never going to ask less of you, nor are your loved ones. The demands in your life will only continue to increase as you move up in your career and your personal life becomes more complex. In addition, stress is not just something that happens in your head. It’s a chemical, hormonal event that radically changes your chemistry and physiology.

The hormones released in response to stress can have many negative effects on your body and brain. As just one example, the stress hormone cortisol kills cells in the brain relating to memory, learning and goal setting. It’s responsible for insomnia. It makes you crave high-fat, high-sugar foods in large amounts, and to store a majority of it as fat, specifically around the midsection.

But the good news is, when we understand the physiology of the stress response, we can build our resiliency to stress. We can train our bodies to recover from stress more quickly and efficiently, as well as raise our threshold for stress. And if that’s not enough, resiliency training can also improve our health and help us lose body fat.

Up until now, many of the things you’re doing to cope with the stresses you’re facing are actually making things worse. You may skip meals and workouts, sacrifice sleep to get more work done, grab sweets or salty snacks, rev yourself up with caffeine and bring yourself down with alcohol. Here are four things you may be doing that are exacerbating your stress, along with tips to build your resiliency:

1. You sacrifice sleep to get things done.

It’s tempting to trade sleep for extra hours of productivity, but lack of sleep ramps up our sympathetic nervous system, pushing us in the direction of the stress response. Simultaneously, it makes the parasympathetic nervous system – which is related to restoring balance and calm — less effective. Sleep deprivation also increases body fat levels, specifically around the midsection. This abdominal fat is not only frustrating, it also increases our risk of diabetes, heart disease, obesity, and even premature death. Keep to a regular sleep and wake cycle, and aim to get between 7-9 hours each night. Sleep is one of the best tools we have for the body to recover from stress.

2. You drink caffeine to get energy and make up for lack of sleep.

In addition to increasing blood pressure, caffeine stimulates the release of the stress hormones adrenaline and cortisol. To make matters worse, caffeine has been shown to work synergistically with mental stress to further increase cortisol levels. From a stress perspective, cutting out caffeine is ideal. Why voluntarily pump more stress hormones into your body? If you choose to consume caffeine, do so in small amounts.

3. You skip meals because you’re too busy to eat.

When we skip meals or go too long without eating, blood glucose (a form of sugar the body uses for energy from many of the foods we eat) drops. When there’s not enough glucose, the body thinks a famine is occurring, the stress response is stimulated and the body secretes cortisol. This puts us into food seeking mode to get much needed energy into the body. Cortisol makes us eat large amounts of food containing fat and sugar, and to store much of this extra energy away in our fat cells for the next glucose emergency. Maintain blood glucose levels and minimize stress by eating about every 3 hours, alternating between moderate sized meals and small snacks.

4. You skip your workout because you don’t have time.

Stress hormones are specifically designed to fuel a short burst of intense physical activity – fighting or fleeing. When we do this, it burns them off and releases another class of hormones that restore balance and counteract the negative consequences of stress. The good news is just 30-60 seconds of intense exercise produces these feel good hormones. Sprint up a flight of stairs, or do a few jumping jacks or burpees. Worst-case scenario, do a few of these shorts bursts to hit the reset button on stress, or squeeze in a few minutes here and there. Exercise can be accumulated throughout the day in 10-minute bouts, which can be just as effective for improving fitness and decreasing body fat as exercising for 30 minutes straight.

For more strategies on how to build your resiliency to stress, read Jenny’s book The Resiliency rEvolution: Your Stress Solution for Life, 60 Seconds at a Time.

Jenny C. Evans is the author of THE RESILIENCY rEVOLUTION: Your Stress Solution For Life 60 Seconds at a Time (Wise Ink Creative Publishing; 2014). She is also founder and CEO of PowerHouse Performance, where she works with thousands of C-suite executives, leaders, and employees worldwide to help them improve their resilience, performance and productivity, while enhancing their health.

Guest advice and opinions are not necessarily those of theglasshammer.com

/by