Gender and the Economy

Author: Carmina Ravanera

  • How can we move beyond DEI backlash?

    How can we move beyond DEI backlash?

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

     

    Highlights

    • Employees from dominant groups may feel threatened by diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, but this threat can lead to transformational learning, growth, and allyship, rather than backlash.
    • Learning and growth are more likely to happen in organizations that value difference and promote diversity.
    • Encouraging dialogue across different perspectives in a safe environment can also facilitate those in dominant groups towards allyship.

    U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent executive order banning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in all federal departments is a stark example of backlash towards initiatives for fairness for historically marginalized groups.

    Research has suggested that dominant groups—those with disproportionate access to resources and power in society, such as white men—feel threatened by DEI because it calls into question values held about their identity, and causes them to believe they will lose resources, power, or opportunities, even if this is not the case. This is called social identity threat.

    For example, the #MeToo movement has made some men feel their identities as men are being tarnished and that they may be unfairly accused. Such feelings of threat can and have led to backlash.

    But recent research by Professors Camellia Bryan and Brent J. Lyons suggests that this threat can actually be an opportunity for growth and allyship in workplaces—if the conditions in an organization are right.

    Transformational learning from threat

    Previous research has suggested that when dominant groups face threats to their identities, they become unwilling to be allies to those in marginalized groups. This research offers a new model that shows how such threats can lead to transformational learning and eventually, allyship.

    The authors propose that when employees in dominant groups feel threatened by DEI or other initiatives for marginalized groups, these feelings of disorientation may in fact help them open up to reflection and introspection. They may begin to assess their existing beliefs and interpretations about marginalized groups, seek out new information that challenges their beliefs (such as books and media), and then update their beliefs. These actions can, in turn, result in meaningful support and allyship.

    …when employees in dominant groups feel threatened by DEI or other initiatives for marginalized groups, these feelings of disorientation may in fact help them open up to reflection and introspection.

    A safe and open organizational climate

    However, such transformational learning may require an organization that encourages growth and change. Organizations that have a culture that promotes diversity, and sees diversity as enhancing learning and performance, can help employees to critically reflect on their identities and beliefs because they are more likely to see differences as respected and valued.

    Dialogue from different perspectives can also facilitate learning for employees from dominant groups. Engaging with colleagues who offer alternative viewpoints in a psychologically safe environment can allow employees to challenge their harmful assumptions and figure out how to support marginalized groups in a way that is not performative. It can also allow them to receive feedback as they change their behaviours.

    As such, the authors suggest that diversity training for employees help them confront bias in a way that encourages rather than shuts down dialogue. Training on how to approach difficult conversations, and on how to critically reflect on one’s interpretations and beliefs, may be more helpful than training that simply introduces information without space for dialogue.

    Training on how to approach difficult conversations, and on how to critically reflect on one’s interpretations and beliefs, may be more helpful than training that simply introduces information without space for dialogue.

    Change will not happen overnight. Members of dominant groups may be more amenable to growth when faced with identity threat if they already value equality and are relatively open to understanding inequality, compared to those who tend to justify inequality and hierarchy.

    However, in an encouraging and safe environment, employees may progress from a surface-level understanding and reflection of inequality to a deeper understanding, and begin to be more critical of beliefs that are harmful to those facing marginalization.

    While some companies and governments are cutting their DEI programs, the organizations that acknowledge backlash and embrace the opportunity for their employees to grow and learn will create more inclusive and engaged workplaces.

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Carmina Ravanera

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    Beyond Backlash: Advancing Dominant-Group Employees’ Learning, Allyship, and Growth Through Social Identity Threat

    Author

    Camellia Bryan and Brent J. Lyons

    Source

    Academy of Management Review

    Published

    2024

    Link

    https://journals.aom.org/doi/epub/10.5465/amr.2021.0521

    Research brief prepared by

    Carmina Ravanera

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • Caught in the “task bind”: How gender stereotypes shape women managers’ work

    Caught in the “task bind”: How gender stereotypes shape women managers’ work

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

     

    Highlights

    • Women retail managers often spend extra time on highly visible “floor” tasks—supervising employees, stocking shelves, or assisting customers—to counter doubts about their managerial capabilities and competence.
    • This emphasis on public tasks reduces the hours spent on “office” responsibilities such as data analysis and forecasting, which are crucial for boosting profits.
    • When more women hold comparable managerial positions, these pressures lessen, enabling a more balanced distribution of tasks and greater engagement in less visible tasks that are crucial for the financial performance of the store.

    Walk into a grocery store on a busy afternoon and you might see a department manager directing staff, checking merchandise, and greeting customers. It’s easy to appreciate the skill it takes to juggle so many moving parts in a hectic environment. Yet there is another layer of this work that’s equally important: analyzing weekly sales, forecasting demand, and mapping out shift schedules. But research by Professor Alexandra Feldberg shows that women retail managers often feel a unique push toward public tasks on the store floor because they sense extra pressure to prove their dedication and competence.

    In the large grocery chain Feldberg studied, women accounted for about 38 percent of department managers overall, but tended to work in “female-typed” departments (like bakery) more often than “male-typed” ones (like meat). Drawing from over 50 interviews, on-site observations in more than two dozen stores, and analyses of company records—including computer logins and weekly financials—Feldberg noticed a recurring concern: women worried that if they spent too long in the office, subordinates might question their commitment. So, to avoid appearing “missing,” many devoted extra effort to supervising staff publicly, stocking shelves, and assisting customers.

    …to avoid appearing “missing,” many [women] devoted extra effort to supervising staff publicly, stocking shelves, and assisting customers.

    The “task bind” for women managers

    While frontline visibility helps with teamwork and customer service, Feldberg uncovered a downside: scaling back on behind-the-scenes responsibilities can hurt departmental performance. “Office tasks” typically involve using the intranet to review sales histories, place orders, calculate labour costs, and track product shrink (loss from spoilage or theft). Departments whose managers dedicated more time to planning and analysis generally saw higher product margins and stronger profits. Yet, under pressure to counter stereotypes of being “less committed,” some women logged fewer computer sessions, overlooking data that might have improved outcomes. This tension—being seen versus managing strategically—defines what Feldberg calls the “task bind.”

    Digging deeper, Feldberg observed that this dynamic is tied to widely held assumptions about who “fits” leadership roles. Many participants recalled beliefs that men were naturally suited to heavy labour or supervisory tasks, while women were expected to be nurturing or detail-oriented. These assumptions heightened the sense that women had to remain visible on the floor to be taken seriously. One manager confessed that she felt torn: “If I spend too much time off the floor, I’m seen as not pitching in. But if I skip budgets or ignore orders, we lose money.”

    Supporting women through networks and representation

    This bind softens when women aren’t isolated in leadership ranks. In divisions or departments where women comprised a greater share of managers, they reported feeling less anxious about others’ perceptions. By exchanging ideas with peers who faced similar doubts, women leaders found it easier to allocate time effectively between the floor and the office. Such support networks helped diminish the stress of constant visibility, reinforcing that analytical and planning tasks are fundamental to strong leadership, not just an add-on.

    In divisions or departments where women comprised a greater share of managers, they reported feeling less anxious about others’ perceptions.

    Based on these findings, Feldberg points to several ways organizations can help. First, publicly recognizing the value of office-based responsibilities—like analyzing sales trends or scheduling staff—legitimizes the time that managers spend away from the store floor. When leaders praise colleagues for smart forecasting, it sends a message that this work matters just as much as front-line presence.

    Second, cultivating peer and mentoring groups among women managers encourages them to share strategies for balancing tasks. Seeing others succeed without constant “floor time” can boost confidence in stepping away for essential planning.

    Finally, broader representation of women across multiple departments relieves the pressure on any single individual to disprove stereotypes by overemphasizing public tasks.

    Ultimately, Feldberg’s research underscores that effective leadership involves more than just high visibility—especially if visibility overshadows critical planning and analysis. By addressing the “task bind,” companies can promote a healthier division of time and resources, creating an environment where managers of all genders can make full use of their skills. This not only paves the way for more equitable workplaces, but also gives departments a stronger foundation for growth and profitability.

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Grusha Agarwal

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    The Task Bind: Explaining Gender Differences in Managerial Tasks and Performance

    Author

    Alexandra C. Feldberg

    Source

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    Published

    2022

    Link

    https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221124607

    Research brief prepared by

    Grusha Agarwal

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • Parental irrationality: Gender norms shape work and child care decisions

    Parental irrationality: Gender norms shape work and child care decisions

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

     

    Highlights

    • While parents think they are making rational financial decisions about their working arrangements and child care costs, gender norms continue to influence these decisions.
    • Parents underestimate costs consistent with the idea that mothers should be caregivers and fathers, providers. They overestimate the cost of fathers reducing their full-time work to act as caregivers, but underestimate the cost of mothers reducing work. In other words, fathers reducing work hours is perceived as more expensive than mothers doing so.
    • Greater awareness around child care policies and financial costs of caregiving might address gendered assumptions and provide support to enable parents to make equitable and informed decisions on child care and their division of labour.

    For new parents, decisions regarding child care and working arrangements are some of the most pressing and impactful. Women have increased their participation in the labour force and their incomes, but they still seem to take a step back from full-time work for child care. Even if mothers make higher incomes than their counterparts, it is fathers who continue to work full-time.

    To investigate why this happens, Regula Zimmermann analyzed 133 in-depth interviews with 54 individuals (27 couples) in Switzerland about their financial decisions before and after the birth of their first child. This setting is of interest because in Switzerland, the state offers little support for child care and parental leave is short–hence, parents need to make pressing decisions about labour and child care.

    Parents make “gendered cost estimates”

    Zimmermann found that parents do not know the actual costs associated with their decisions, making what she calls “gendered cost estimates.” In lieu of knowing the real costs associated with their child care or working arrangement decisions, these estimates rely on both assumptions about finances and gender norms, and may not align with real costs.

    For instance, the real cost of reducing a parent’s labour requires knowing income tax rate and the cost of child care, yet parents did not mention that they knew these calculations. Instead, consistent with existing literature, almost all parents in Zimmermann’s sample described parental duties as belonging to the mother.

    Another finding of her study was the perception of “gain” versus “loss” of income if mothers decided to reduce their working hours to care for children. Most parents did not view a mother’s transition to part-time work as a loss of full-time income. Instead, they compared her reduced earnings to the alternative of her not working at all. Comparatively, the reference for a father’s reduction in work was full-time work (i.e., income loss), thus reinforcing the narrative that care provided by fathers is expensive, and care provided by mothers is free.

    Most parents did not view a mother’s transition to part-time work as a loss of full-time income. Instead, they compared her reduced earnings to the alternative of her not working at all.

    The research showed that money did have a small effect on how parents share paid and unpaid work. The norm of fathers as the primary provider is in decline, with mothers who earn substantially more than their counterparts spending more time working outside the home, compared to women who earn less or the same as their partners. Yet, the “gendered cost estimates” undertaken by parents attributed less financial value to mothers’ paid work and child care than to fathers’ paid work and child care, even when both earned the same amount of money, or she earned more.

    Informing parents through policy

    This reluctance to engage with financial specifics sheds light on a social dimension of decision-making around work and child care. “Parents often avoid discussing their financial calculations, perhaps because they feel it reflects a personal failure not to have planned better,” Zimmermann noted. She described how deeply entrenched societal norms influence these decisions: “None of the parents I interviewed said, ‘It costs us $60,000 a year for a mother to stay home, but we think it’s worth it.’” Instead, they often ended up undervaluing mothers’ caregiving.

    Zimmermann highlights that future policy initiatives can equip parents with accessible tools to calculate the financial implications of child care and reduced work hours. “There is no calculator which integrates taxes, child care costs, and other financial factors,” she explains, emphasizing the complexity of these decisions. “Policymakers implicitly assume that parents are informed, but this study found that none of them were aware of the costs of their work and childcare arrangements.” This lack of accessible information leaves parents to navigate decisions without a clear understanding of their long-term financial risks, such as implications for pensions and retirement, or financial vulnerability.

    “Policymakers implicitly assume that parents are informed, but this study found that none of them were aware of the costs of their work and child care arrangements.”

    For parents making important child care decisions, gender norms on child care and valuation of work continue to shape parental decision-making around work and child care, often under a guise of rationality. While parents believe they are making rational choices, greater education and awareness of true costs are still needed to achieve equality.

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Laura Lam

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    Do Couples Take Financially Rational Decisions When They Become Parents? No, But They Believe They Do

    Author

    Regula Zimmermann

    Source

    Gender & Society

    Published

    2024

    Link

    https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08912432231189302

    Research brief prepared by

    Laura Lam

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • Navigating role conflict: How time management shapes workplace connections

    Navigating role conflict: How time management shapes workplace connections

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

     

    Highlights

    • Role conflict, defined as the tension resulting from competing demands between work and family responsibilities, is an increasingly prevalent challenge for professionals.
    • This study found that workers facing daily role conflict view workplace interactions as threats to balancing work and family. To protect both roles, they control these interactions, but in turn, experience less workplace belonging and fewer opportunities to share support and advice. In contrast, workers without daily role conflict encourage interactions, which often extends work into non-work hours, but fosters a stronger sense of belonging and increased opportunities.
    • The study suggests expanding our perspectives on workplace devotion: a worker may show commitment through focused, efficient work rather than constant availability.

    A colleague knocks on your office door to start a conversation, you bump into someone in the hallway who wants to chat, or after a meeting ends, the discussion shifts to unrelated topics. In these moments, do you stay engaged or excuse yourself, citing the need to focus on pressing tasks? What if you have to stick to a 9-to-5 schedule, given your family responsibilities?

    These situations are familiar to many professionals who experience role conflict: the tension that arises from competing work and family demands. In recent years, this challenge has become increasingly common across professions. While much research has explored how role conflict impacts family commitments and relationships, its influence on workplace interactions remains underexamined. In response to this gap, Professors Vanessa Conzon and Ruthanne Huising investigated how professionals facing role conflict navigate unpredictable and time-intensive workplace interactions.

    The researchers drew on ethnographic data from 72 STEM professionals across three organizations. Their study involved shadowing participants throughout their workday, followed by end-of-day interviews. Additionally, some participants completed time diaries for two separate days. Notably, 60% of the participants had children of high school age or younger.

    Managing role conflict

    Through analyzing field notes and interview transcripts, the researchers found that interactions with colleagues often posed significant time management challenges. These interactions were typically initiated by others, varied unpredictably in frequency and duration, and were often socially awkward to cut short. As a result, workers with more versus less role conflict employed different strategies to navigate these engagements:

    1. Workers who experience more daily role conflict (e.g., parents with extensive childcare responsibilities)

    These individuals regulated their workplace interactions to protect both family commitments and their limited time. Their approach involved controlling workplace interactions by minimizing encounters perceived as social or peripheral in order to efficiently manage tasks. By doing so, they were able to complete most of their work within standard work hours and make time for family.

    However, this approach inadvertently weakened their workplace relationships, limiting their sense of belonging (e.g., closeness, trust, attachment) and access to informal exchanges (e.g., information, advice, resources). Although these workers excelled at completing tasks efficiently, they often missed out on informal support, such as advice, invitations to collaborate, or word-of-mouth opportunities to join new projects.

    Although these workers excelled at completing tasks efficiently, they often missed out on informal support…

    1. Workers who experience less daily role conflict

    Workers who experience less daily role conflict often adopt encouraging practices when managing workplace interactions. They actively engage in interactions, fostering connections with colleagues. While this engagement frequently extends their work hours into evenings and weekends, it strengthens their sense of belonging and enriches exchanges.

    Their workplace relationships are marked by greater closeness, trust, and attachment, which, in turn, facilitate the flow of advice, information, and resources. This positive reinforcement creates a cyclical effect, where the value placed on collegial relationships motivates continued engagement, further strengthening their professional networks and expanding access to new opportunities.

    This research highlights how, while limiting workplace interactions can help manage role conflict, it can also hinder the development of workplace relationships. Traditionally, the “ideal worker” is constantly accessible and ready to engage at any time. This study challenges that assumption, emphasizing that time-conscious work can also signal dedication. By introducing the “occupied worker”—someone who demonstrates commitment through focused, efficient work and streamlined interactions rather than constant availability—this research broadens our understanding of workplace devotion.

    Traditionally, the “ideal worker” is constantly accessible and ready to engage at any time. This study challenges that assumption, emphasizing that time-conscious work can also signal dedication.

    Cultivating more inclusive work cultures

    Building on these findings, Professors Conzon and Huising suggest that organizations can cultivate a more inclusive work culture by acknowledging diverse ways of demonstrating commitment. Key implications for organizations include:

    1. Structured relationship-building:
      Implementing mentorship programs can help employees build meaningful connections without requiring time-consuming small talk, supporting those with limited time to engage in professional relationships.
    2. Support for flexible work:
      Remote and flexible work arrangements offer critical support for employees with caregiving responsibilities, particularly women, who often shoulder a disproportionate share of childcare. Flexible policies can help create a more equitable and balanced work environment.
    3. Shift focus from “facetime” to results:
      By prioritizing outcomes over physical presence, organizations can challenge outdated assumptions about dedication and support alternative workstyles that prioritize efficiency and focus.
    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Kuan Su

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    Devoted but Disconnected: Managing Role Conflict Through Interactional Control

    Author

    Vanessa M. Conzon, Ruthanne Huising

    Source

    Organization Science

    Published

    2024

    Link

    https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2019.13517

    Research brief prepared by

    Kuan Su

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • Re-thinking the advice to women to “lean in” and always negotiate

    Re-thinking the advice to women to “lean in” and always negotiate

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

     

    Highlights

    • Women are skilled at choosing when to negotiate and succeed in gaining more 74% of the time when they decide to negotiate.
    • Forcing women to negotiate in all situations leads to worse outcomes, with financial losses tripling compared to when they have a choice.
    • Both men and women benefit from deciding when to negotiate, but societal pressure disproportionately pushes women to negotiate more often, even when it may not be beneficial.

    With the recent passing of Lilly Ledbetter, the legendary advocate for gender-wage equality, it is timely to revisit our assumptions about how to close the gender wage gap. Many believe that women should negotiate more often—the “lean in” movement, for example, advises women to ask for more during salary negotiations. But is negotiating more always the best approach for women?

    Women know when to negotiate

    A study by Christine Exley, Muriel Niederle, and Lise Vesterlund found that women are skilled at recognizing when negotiating will benefit them. The researchers conducted a series of controlled experiments where participants could either choose to negotiate or were forced to negotiate, which allowed them to observe decision-making processes and outcomes. When given a choice, women enter negotiations that lead to positive financial outcomes. In fact, the study found that when women choose to negotiate, they end up with a better deal 74% of the time. This means that women are good at selecting opportunities where negotiation pays off, and they generally avoid situations that are likely to lead to losses.

    However, when women are forced to negotiate in all situations, the outcomes are notably worse. As Christine Exley explains, “Negotiations can lead to better outcomes, but unnecessary ones are costly. They can also leave women feeling pressured to negotiate while worrying about overdoing it.”

    The data backs this up: losses triple when women are required to negotiate in unfavorable circumstances. Indeed, more negotiations do not necessarily lead to better results—sometimes, they do the opposite. Forcing women to negotiate in every scenario strips them of their ability to exercise sound judgment about when negotiations will work in their favor.

    When women choose to negotiate, they end up with a better deal 74% of the time.

    How do men compare?

    The findings further suggest that men and women are equally capable of recognizing when a negotiation is worth entering. Like women, men also experience more financial losses when they are pushed to negotiate in all situations.

    Importantly, the study found no evidence that men are inherently better at negotiating or at identifying good opportunities for negotiation compared to women. Both genders benefit when they have the freedom to decide when to negotiate, and both experience increased risks when they are forced to negotiate without considering the context.

    Still, there is greater pressure on women to negotiate than on men

    Despite evidence that women know when to enter win-worthy negotiations, society tends to put more pressure on them than on men to negotiate. A follow-up experiment revealed a stronger expectation among people that women should not be allowed to avoid negotiations—even when it might not be the best choice for them—while men were given more flexibility. This shows a tendency to push women into actions that aren’t necessarily in their best interest, a phenomenon that the researchers call the paternalistic demand.

    This pressure to negotiate puts women in a double bind: If they follow their own judgment and avoid negotiations in unfavorable situations, they are criticized for not being assertive enough. But when they are pushed into negotiating in all situations and things go badly, they can end up losing money and even damaging their reputation at work.

    Where do we go next?

    These findings offer several actionable insights for organizational leaders and HR managers:

    1. Avoid blanket advice for women to negotiate more: The data show that women are already skilled at knowing when to enter negotiations. Encouraging all employees to negotiate in all situations, regardless of potential outcomes, can lead to financial losses and heightened stress, particularly for women.
    2. Support a choice-driven approach: Rather than pushing for more frequent negotiations, organizations should focus on creating a work environment where employees feel empowered to choose when negotiation is appropriate. Transparency in salary ranges, clear criteria for promotions, and open channels for discussing growth can enable employees to make informed choices about negotiation.
    3. Challenge gendered expectations around negotiation. Leaders should recognize that women face unique pressures to negotiate more often due to societal biases. It’s important to challenge stereotypes and avoid creating additional pressures on women to negotiate more when it may not be in their best interest. Removing the pressure to “lean in” at every opportunity can help reduce unnecessary stress and lead to better outcomes.

    The notion that women should “lean in” and negotiate more frequently overlooks important nuances in negotiation dynamics that women are apparently already aware of. Instead of uniformly pushing women to always negotiate, organizations should create fair and supportive structures where all employees can freely choose to negotiate when it makes sense for them.

    As for employees themselves who feel pressured to negotiate despite their instincts suggesting otherwise, Exley offers a reassuring reminder: “While learning negotiation tactics is valuable, both women and men should know that the idea to ‘always negotiate’ is misguided. The situation matters, and your preferences matter too.”

    “…the idea to ‘always negotiate’ is misguided. The situation matters, and your preferences matter too,”

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Alice Choe

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    Knowing When to Ask: The Cost of Leaning In

    Author

    Christine Exley, Muriel Niederle, and Lise Vesterlund

    Source

    Journal of Political Economy

    Published

    2020

    Link

    https://doi.org/10.1086/704616

    Research brief prepared by

    Alice Choe

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • To confront or not confront: The psychological and social costs of (not) confronting racism

    To confront or not confront: The psychological and social costs of (not) confronting racism

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

     

    Highlights

    • Indigenous, Black, and People of Colour (IBPOC) workers in the music industry face frequent microaggressions. These subtle but pervasive acts of racism create ongoing challenges, forcing workers to decide whether to confront or avoid these situations.
    • Those who avoid conflict often carry a heavy “psychic weight” from constantly managing how others see them, while those who speak up risk damaging their professional relationships and future career opportunities.
    • The findings highlight the need for systemic changes in the industry. Employers must address the hidden labor IBPOC workers perform to navigate racism and create safer environments where workers can confront discrimination without fearing career setbacks.

    Indigenous, Black, and People of Colour (IBPOC) workers frequently face subtle acts of racism in the music industry. These microaggressions often stem from the industry’s unspoken preference for Whiteness as the default or “normal” way to look and behave. In new research, Alanna Stuart and Kim de Laat conducted interviews with 55 IBPOC workers and found two common approaches these workers use to handle racism: avoiding conflict to protect relationships or confronting it directly. Both strategies come with significant emotional and mental costs that affect their careers and well-being.

    Dealing with racism

    In interviews, one musician shared that she often receives stereotypical comments related to her ethnicity, such as being asked to order Indian food. A sound technician described how he carefully chooses the music he plays to avoid reinforcing racial stereotypes. These examples illustrate how IBPOC workers are “othered” in their daily interactions at work.

    IBPOC workers tend to rely on one of two strategies to deal with these situations. Some choose to avoid direct confrontation. They feel that by staying quiet or adapting to White norms, they can preserve professional relationships and protect future opportunities. For instance, one manager described the mental calculus that goes into promoting one of his Black artists; he shared how he feels the need to “water down” the artist’s work to avoid alienating White colleagues. Such self-censorship underscores the constant balancing act that IBPOC workers perform to fit in and secure opportunities.

    …those with less job security or social capital may feel pressured to avoid conflict out of fear of being labeled as “difficult.”

    Others, however, confront racism when it occurs, driven by a sense of responsibility to their communities. A musician recounted how he pushed back in a media interview that misrepresented his song’s message about systemic racism. Confronting racism can be empowering, but it carries risks. It can strain relationships with those in power who control future job opportunities, potentially harming long-term career prospects.

    The findings also suggest other factors—including workplaces that are highly masculinized and individual workers’ tenures in the creative industry—influence how IBPOC workers handle racism. For instance, those with less job security or social capital may feel pressured to avoid conflict out of fear of being labeled as “difficult,” while others who are more established in their careers might feel empowered to confront racism directly.

    The psychic and social costs of dealing with racism

    Both strategies take a toll on IBPOC workers. Those who avoid conflict often carry a heavy emotional and mental burden from constantly managing how others perceive them. This ongoing strain, sometimes called “psychic weight,” can be exhausting. As first author Stuart explains, “It’s an advantage to not have to think about how to navigate these moments. Not dealing with microaggressions means not having your creative process encumbered by racism.”

    “Not dealing with microaggressions means not having your creative process encumbered by racism.”

    For those who confront racism, the emotional cost comes from knowing that speaking up might hurt their careers. Even when standing up for what’s right, they risk losing professional standing in a field where reputation is critical for securing future opportunities.

    Need for industry-wide change

    Racism is not an occasional barrier for IBPOC workers; it’s a constant part of their daily experience, forcing them to weigh the risks of speaking up. This dynamic is especially difficult in an industry where over half of creative workers in Canada earn less than $40,000 CAD annually (Statistics Canada, 2022). The ongoing calculation of whether to confront racism in such a precarious environment adds unfair strain to the creative process.

    The findings highlight the urgent need for industry-wide changes to address the hidden labor IBPOC workers perform to manage racism. Employers and industry leaders must recognize how inequality manifests in these workplaces and take concrete steps to create environments where IBPOC workers can confront discrimination without jeopardizing their professional futures.

    At the same time, Stuart offers this compassionate reminder for IBPOC music artists and industry workers who bear this burden: “Your feelings are valid. I don’t say this to pacify but rather to help alleviate the self-questioning that can compound the psychic weight of racist microaggressions.”

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Alice Choe

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    Bearing Psychic Weight and Accountability: Navigating Racism and Microaggressions in Creative Work

    Author

    Alanna Stuart, Kim de Laat

    Source

    Work, Employment and Society

    Published

    2024

    Link

    https://doi.org/10.1177/09500170241254325

    Research brief prepared by

    Alice Choe

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • Authentic enough? Navigating gender expression and social acceptance for transgender employees

    Authentic enough? Navigating gender expression and social acceptance for transgender employees

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

     

    Highlights

    • This research follows 25 transgender employees over a two-year period, exploring their perceptions of colleagues’ reactions to their gender expression and their strategies for managing identity in the workplace.
    • The findings reveal that expressing one’s “authentic self” is a complex and dynamic process, where individuals experiment with and discover genuine expressions of their gender identity while striving for social acceptance in the workplace.
    • Recognizing that gender transition is often a complex, non-linear, and evolving process that may not follow a specific timeframe, organizations should adopt a flexible, long-term approach to fostering a supportive environment for transgender employees.

    Despite increasing attention to transgender experiences in the workplace, little is known about how transgender individuals’ gender expression evolves during their transitions in professional settings. Professors Sophie Hennekam and Jamie Ladge address this gap through an in-depth study of transgender employees’ perceptions of colleagues’ reactions to their gender expression and the strategies they use to navigate their gender identities at work.

    Conducted in the Netherlands, the study involved 25 transgender employees from diverse occupations who participated in four interviews over a two-year period. These interviews captured their reflections on past experiences, current realities, and future aspirations. By documenting these narratives at four intervals throughout the transition process, this research offers insights into how transgender employees’ gender expression evolves over time at different stages of the transition, enriching our understanding of how transgender individuals navigate their evolving identities in a professional context.

    The researchers found that gender expression for transgender employees evolves in a three-stage process, including: initiating, performing, and continuing.

    Initiating transition at work

    The authors identified three key triggers that prompted participants to begin their workplace transitions: 1) a sense of readiness cultivated through personal experiences outside of work, 2) the realization that continuing to express their gender in ways that felt inauthentic was no longer sustainable, 3) a desire to be seen and validated by colleagues in a way that aligned with their self-perception. For many, the decision to transition was accompanied by a sense of inevitability, expressed through sentiments like “I don’t have a choice” and “concealment is not a real option.” At this stage, participants held a clear vision of their “true” or authentic self and expressed a strong desire to embody this identity in their professional lives.

    For many, the decision to transition was accompanied by a sense of inevitability, expressed through sentiments like “I don’t have a choice”…

    Performing: Ongoing self-discovery

    Following the initial stage of expressing their envisioned authentic self, many transgender employees entered the “performing” stage, characterized by changes in physical appearance and behavior to align with their gender expression. During this phase, many engaged in experimentation, exploring different versions of expressing their gender identity.

    While most participants felt their changes were generally accepted – particularly those that conformed to societal norms of male and female behavior – some struggled to experience their gender displays as fully authentic. What initially felt true to them began to shift, leading to a reimagining of their “true self” as they learned more about themselves and responded to feedback from colleagues. This trial-and-error approach was instrumental in their journey toward a gender expression that felt both authentic and socially acceptable.

    Continuing: Authenticity as dynamic

    In the continuing stage, many transgender employees adopted an “authentic enough” gender expression – a balance between personal authenticity and social acceptance. This phase highlights the nonlinear nature of identity transition: there is a dynamic interplay between the desire to express one’s gender authentically and the need to feel accepted by others.

    …there is a dynamic interplay between the desire to express one’s gender authentically and the need to feel accepted by others.

    Authenticity as an evolving process

    These findings challenge the notion that individuals inherently know how to express their authentic selves or that authenticity has a definitive endpoint. Instead, the authors posit that authenticity emerges as an evolving process, shaped through ongoing interactions with others. As Professor Hennekam notes, “People don’t know what it is or how to be authentic… And when they start trying to express it, they may realize that it’s different from what they thought.”

    For transgender employees, gender expression in the workplace is often an evolving journey involving experimentation and adaptation. Rather than arriving at a final, unchanging sense of self, authenticity is better understood as an ongoing process of self-discovery, shaped by personal insights and external feedback.

    Flexible and long-term organizational support

    The study also highlights the importance of organizations viewing gender transition as a non-linear and evolving process. As Professor Hennekam observed, some progressive organizations still tend to frame gender transition as a simple, time-bound progression: “They tend to see it as a process that will be limited in time… as long as [transgender employees] stick perfectly to the plan, things are really okay.”

    However, this rigid perspective can be unsupportive when individuals deviate from expected timelines or experience periods of self-revision. To foster a truly inclusive environment, organizations should adopt a flexible, long-term approach that acknowledges the complexities of transitioning and accommodates its evolving nature.

     

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Kuan Su

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    Free to be me? Evolving gender expression and the dynamic interplay between authenticity and the desire to be accepted at work

    Author

    Sophie Hennekam, Jamie J. Ladge

    Source

    Academy of Management Journal

    Published

    2023

    Link

    https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2020.1308

    Research brief prepared by

    Kuan Su

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • Reporting on precarious ground: Women in digital journalism

    Reporting on precarious ground: Women in digital journalism

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

     

    Highlights

    • Women and women of colour in digital journalism face increased levels of precarious and hostile working environments.
    • The rise in contract work in journalism has increased precarity for journalists and they worry how their reporting might jeopardize their employment.
    • Collective bargaining and increasing gender and racial diversity in journalism may help mitigate these experiences.

    In an era of endless digital news streams and the fierce divides on social media, where we get our news is increasingly important. Part of that knowledge includes paying attention to who the journalists are behind the stories we consume.

    Nicole Cohen, associate professor at the Institute of Communication, Culture, Information, and Technology at the University of Toronto and Shannon Clarke, PhD candidate at Queen’s University, studied women’s experiences in digital journalism, examining factors that have led to greater inequality in opportunities.

    Their work builds on recent research showing that journalism is dominated by journalists who identify as white (78 percent). While gender and racial diversity have increased in the field, particularly in junior roles, precarious work and specifically the precarity of women’s work remain significant issues.

    The authors interviewed 23 women working in digital journalism, approximately 50 percent of whom self-identified as women of color, across four cities in Canada. These interviews uncovered several prevailing themes of sexism and racism in the workplace, including a hostile work environment, a lack of respect for their expertise and work, precarious working conditions, and limited decision-making power.

    Facing prejudice and precarity

    Women journalists in the study described facing prejudices in their daily work. For example, journalists of color reported that senior managers often expected them to cover topics related to their own ethnic groups, even though they did not wish to be confined to one set of stories. Women journalists also encountered bias from managers, who assumed they would be “biased” in their reporting while men writing on similar topics were perceived as more “neutral.” These findings align with the idea that journalism is still predominantly a “boy’s club.” Women journalists in the study also reflected on the harassment they continue to face at work, which their male counterparts often fail to understand.

    Women journalists also encountered bias from managers, who assumed they would be “biased”…while men writing on similar topics were perceived as more “neutral.”

    Participants also described facing precarity in employment, which hinders their freedom as journalists. As standard, stable employment decreases in availability, journalists take on more gigs and contract work. This in turn affects the control that they have over their work, as they may be afraid to venture out and have full autonomy over the content of their story for fear of jeopardizing their work contracts. In other words, precarity of employment impacts their freedom of expression to communicate their stories. Participants in the study remarked that journalists of colour in particular often do not get full-time jobs and this affects how they can speak up and stand firm behind the ideas in their work.

    Cohen and Clarke became interested in this topic based on their personal experiences in the field, when they noticed that there was a paucity of research that takes an intersectional approach in understanding journalism. They were curious if the increasing popularity of digital outlets might change experiences of women journalists in the field.

    …precarity of employment impacts their freedom of expression to communicate their stories.

    For Clarke, one of the biggest surprises was in “how normalized this precarity is, how accepted it is.” Many workers feel compelled to accept poor pay and demanding conditions indefinitely, as if this reality is an unspoken rite of passage. “You have to put up with these conditions indefinitely,” she said, describing the common mindset that “everyone has to do it, so you have to do it too.”

    Representation and unionization

    Both authors comment that there is no easy fix to address these issues. A solution may lie in hiring more people of colour and placing them in management roles. “When people of colour have decision-making power, they can influence content in ways that better represent diverse communities,” Cohen explained. However, she acknowledged that simply increasing diversity in leadership won’t address all structural barriers.

    There is also the growing trend of unionization among journalists, who are increasingly turning to collective bargaining as a means of securing justice and fair treatment in the workplace. “Journalists are spearheading this movement,” Cohen said. “They’re actively negotiating change and standing up for justice through worker-led initiatives.” There are programs for advocacy work and resources, for example, at the Mary Ann Shadd Cary Centre for Journalism and Belonging. There is need for continual attention on labour issues within journalism, such as how collective action is being fostered and the role of media unions.

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Laura Lam

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    Diversity Through Precarity? Gender, Race, and Work in Digital Journalism

    Author

    Nicole Cohen and Shannon Clarke

    Source

    Canadian Journal of Communication

    Published

    2024

    Link

    https://cjc.utpjournals.press/doi/10.3138/cjc-2022-0038

    Research brief prepared by

    Laura Lam

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • The delegation dilemma: Why women leaders hesitate to hand off tasks

    The delegation dilemma: Why women leaders hesitate to hand off tasks

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Picture this: you’re a rising star in your company, juggling multiple projects and a growing team. The key to success? Learning to delegate. But what if the simple act of handing off tasks feels like walking a tightrope? For many women leaders, this scenario isn’t just imagination—it’s reality. Research by professors Modupe Akinola, Ashley E. Martin, and Katherine W. Phillips reveals a surprising gender gap in delegation, one that could be holding women back from reaching their full potential as leaders. Across five studies, the authors demonstrate that women have more negative associations with delegation compared to men, leading women to delegate less frequently and have lower quality interactions when they do delegate.

    Delegation is both a communal (i.e., relational) and agentic (i.e., assertive) behaviour. The authors argue that although delegation helps subordinates develop (a communal act), women still see assigning tasks as a largely agentic behaviour. Since the assertive nature of delegation looms larger than the communal aspects, this triggers concerns about violating feminine gender role expectations. That is, women leaders may find it more difficult to delegate because they perceive that it conflicts with the expectation for women to act in a way that shows communality.

    Not only did this study find that women delegate less, but they delegate differently as well. When women do delegate, they spend less time with subordinates and have lower quality interactions: women who delegated spent an average of 33 seconds interacting with subordinates, compared to 54 seconds for men. Subordinates also rated women as less considerate and supportive during delegation interactions. The study also found that women report more guilt about overburdening subordinates and greater fear of backlash when delegating compared to men.

    Women leaders may find it more difficult to delegate because they perceive that it conflicts with the expectation for women to act in a way that shows communality.

    As Akinola says, “Delegation is a tricky thing because on one hand, you are passing something on to somebody else and you feel like you are bossing them around. On the other hand, you are helping them learn, develop, and grow. This could be harder for women because they are expected to not boss people around and be more communal. Some of the emotions associated with delegation for women revolve around guilt and anxiety for overburdening their subordinates…if you flip it to make delegation as more a communal part of the job, women will be more likely to do it.”

    The authors were able to mitigate women’s negative association with delegating by reminding them of the communal aspects of delegating, that is, reminding them that it helps subordinates to learn and grow. While successful, the intervention plays on existing stereotypes and Akinola would like to explore alternate avenues: “I would like to see other interventions that do not rely on just letting women know that it’s good to be communal. Maybe it’s something like telling them that it does help them get more work done. I want more tools to teach women how to delegate.”

    Indeed, the success of their intervention is underscored by their finding that participants who chose to delegate tasks outperformed those who did not delegate. This suggests that women’s reluctance to delegate may hinder their effectiveness and productivity as leaders, and interventions like those the authors tested may be critical for women.

    This research has important implications for organizations seeking to develop women leaders and create more equitable workplaces. Leadership development programs can address women’s potential reluctance to delegate and provide strategies to overcome negative associations. For instance, these programs could include role-playing exercises that allow women to practice delegation in a safe environment, helping them build confidence and overcome anxiety. Organizational cultures and performance management systems could recognize and reward the communal, developmental aspects of delegation. This could include setting delegation goals for managers or creating cross-functional projects that necessitate task-sharing. Managers could be encouraged to frame delegation in communal terms, emphasizing how it benefits and develops subordinates.

    Organizational cultures and performance management systems could recognize and reward the communal, developmental aspects of delegation.

    The authors are excited about the new avenues this opens for future investigation. Further research is needed to identify other critical leadership behaviors that may be misaligned with gendered expectations of women. Additionally, longitudinal studies could examine whether the performance implications of gender differences in delegation compound over time. Importantly, Akinola also wants to explore this phenomenon beyond just gender: “There are a lot of other identities in an organization that would lead one to feeling guilt and anxiety when being agentic. So, I am curious that if you looked at race, sexual orientation, or other marginalized identities, would we see similar effects. And would a similar intervention or a different one [as the one we used in this research] be more effective?”

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Grusha Agarwal

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    The Delegation Dilemma: Why Women Leaders Hesitate to Hand Off Tasks

    Author

    Modupe Akinola, Ashley E. Martin, Katherine W. Phillips

    Source

    Academy of Management Journal

    Published

    2018

    Link

    https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0662

    Research brief prepared by

    Grusha Agarwal

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

  • Addressing himpathy: How organizations can navigate bias in sexual assault allegations

    Addressing himpathy: How organizations can navigate bias in sexual assault allegations

    [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” enable_mobile=”no” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” border_style=”solid” margin_top=”20″ type=”legacy”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”3_4″ layout=”3_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”false” first=”true” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_text hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” text_transform=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    In 2018, the US Congress and the public witnessed the polarizing hearings involving then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, during which Blasey Ford made a detailed and credible testimony accusing Kavanaugh of sexual assault. Despite these serious allegations, her testimony was followed by an outpouring of sympathy for Kavanaugh and anger towards Blasey Ford.[i] And Blasey Ford is not alone in this experience. The public expression of sympathy toward the accused predator, a phenomenon that philosopher and professor Kate Manne terms “himpathy,” is also present in lower profile cases of sexual misconduct accusation.

    This study explores himpathy, who is more likely to experience himpathy, and what managers in an organization can do to navigate it at work. The researchers find that individuals who value loyalty, authority, and purity more than the average person are more likely to see the victim seeking justice as disloyal to the organization. In a case of sexual misconduct allegations, managers are advised to stay neutral and refrain from language that could be interpreted as the victim being disloyal. Furthermore, they should form an investigative committee with diverse backgrounds to ensure biases stay out of the decision-making process.

    …individuals who value loyalty, authority, and purity more than the average person are more likely to see the victim…as disloyal to the organization.

    Himpathy, as defined by Manne, refers to “excessive sympathy shown toward male perpetrators of sexual violence.”[ii] Himpathy is often expressed in an angry tone, and the language used to express those sympathies is usually linked to the victim and takes the form of gaslighting. One typical example of himpathy is somebody asking on their social media account why the victim wants to hurt the accused’s career. Another example is death threats, which Blasey Ford received long after the testimony. Many of these actions are clearly meant to hurt the victim, yet they are hard to take action against. This is to say, himpathy is not merely an opinion; it may cause additional harm to the victim and create a workplace environment that allows for misconduct to continue.

    Professors Samantha J. Dodson, Rachel D. Goodwin, Jesse Graham, and Kristina A. Diekmann explored the factors behind himpathy in this study. The researchers studied thousands of tweets after the #MeToo movement and paired this with experimental and survey evidence. Their research highlights that individuals exhibiting himpathy often prioritize group-focused moral values such as loyalty, authority, and purity. This emphasis on group cohesion can extend to organizations or institutions. Using that lens, reporting a colleague’s misconduct is viewed as morally wrong, leading to undue sympathy for the accused, lower perceptions of the victim’s credibility, and decreased desires to punish the perpetrator.

    …himpathy is not merely an opinion; it may cause additional harm to the victim and create a workplace environment that allows for misconduct to continue.

    What are some strategies for workplace interventions? The researchers offer two key insights. Firstly, respond judiciously. Recognize that most individuals have sympathy for the victim. However, there will be a small but vocal group that may sway the situation, and if given decision-making power, will make biased decisions. Thus, refraining from depicting the victim as disloyal, inferior, or impure will not validate the himpathy perspective. Dodson explains that while a manager’s sympathy towards the victim may not sway someone who feels himpathy, it still may prevent the himpathetic group from growing louder, potentially averting further adverse effects on the victim before the misconduct (in the vast majority of cases) is confirmed.

    Secondly, when forming investigative committees for alleged misconduct, ensure that the committee consists of multiple people and comes with diverse perspectives, given the sensitive and emotional nature of sexual misconduct. Dodson and colleagues also recommend adding protective measures for the committee, such as anonymity or legal immunity, which can shield committee members from pressure exerted by himpathetic leaders within the organization.

    Dodson and colleagues’ pioneering work sheds light on the existence and dynamics of himpathy, but further research is required to better understand the different forms himpathy can take and how they affect the victim. For example, a death threat will have an entirely different impact on the victim than a social media user publicly questioning the victim’s credibility, or someone close to the victim discouraging them from coming forward because it could ruin the perpetrator’s career. We should also try to understand the reasons for the perpetrator’s behavior. This is particularly important and fruitful in the workplace since it is more clearly and closely governed than society as a whole. Dodson hopes that organizations will see the benefits this research could offer and open their doors and databases for such studies.

    References

    [i] Stolberg, Sheryl Gay. 2018. “Kavanaugh’s Nomination in Turmoil as Accuser Says He Assaulted Her Decades Ago.” The New York Times, September 16, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/16/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-sexual-assault.html; “Kavanaugh’s Accuser Struggled to Come Forward, Friends Say.” 2018. AP News. September 19, 2018. https://apnews.com/article/44f88e604eae493e84d02a13eaa8c1c9.; Italie, Hillel. 2023. “Christine Blasey Ford, Who Testified against Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Will Release a Memoir in 2024.” AP News. September 13, 2023. https://apnews.com/article/christine-blasey-ford-memoir-b87467b11e59d2ce74767b6dc8ce6adb.

    [ii] Manne, K. (2017, p 338). Down girl: The logic of misogyny. Oxford University Press.

    ______
    Research brief prepared by:

    Manuela R. Collis

    [/fusion_text][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_button link=”https://www.gendereconomy.org/research-briefs/” target=”_blank” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” color=”custom” button_gradient_top_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_bottom_color=”#62bd19″ button_gradient_top_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ button_gradient_bottom_color_hover=”#00c2e2″ stretch=”yes” icon_position=”left” icon_divider=”no” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″]See more research briefs[/fusion_button][fusion_separator style_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” top_margin=”20″ bottom_margin=”20″ alignment=”center” /][fusion_recent_posts layout=”default” hover_type=”none” columns=”3″ number_posts=”3″ offset=”0″ pull_by=”category” cat_slug=”research-briefs” thumbnail=”yes” title=”yes” meta=”no” meta_author=”no” meta_categories=”no” meta_date=”yes” meta_comments=”yes” meta_tags=”no” excerpt=”no” excerpt_length=”35″ strip_html=”yes” scrolling=”no” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ /][/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_4″ layout=”1_4″ center_content=”no” hover_type=”none” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” background_position=”left top” background_repeat=”no-repeat” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ last=”true” first=”false” border_sizes_top=”0″ border_sizes_bottom=”0″ border_sizes_left=”0″ border_sizes_right=”0″ background_blend_mode=”overlay” min_height=”” link=””][fusion_title title_type=”text” rotation_effect=”bounceIn” display_time=”1200″ highlight_effect=”circle” loop_animation=”off” highlight_width=”9″ highlight_top_margin=”0″ title_link=”off” link_target=”_self” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”briefsummary” content_align=”left” size=”3″ text_shadow=”no” text_shadow_blur=”0″ text_stroke=”no” text_stroke_size=”1″ text_overflow=”none” gradient_font=”no” gradient_start_position=”0″ gradient_end_position=”100″ gradient_type=”linear” radial_direction=”center center” linear_angle=”180″ style_type=”none” animation_direction=”left” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″]

    Title

    Moral Foundations, Himpathy, and Punishment Following Organizational Sexual Misconduct Allegations

    Author

    Samantha J. Dodson, Rachael D. Goodwin, Jesse Graham, Kristina A. Diekmann

    Source

    Organization Science

    Published

    2023

    Link

    https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.1652

    Research brief prepared by

    Manuela R. Collis

    [/fusion_title][fusion_widget_area name=”avada-custom-sidebar-researchbriefsidebar” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” /][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]