Unit 8 activity 2
In the Gender-Leader Implicit Association test, I scored -1. This indicates that I do not associate male with leader, and female with supporter. I suppose this is not surprising given that I am female, and pursuing education in leadership. After I went through the test, I did think of a few other women in my life and wondered how they would fare on this test!
The Catalyst Report did not have a definition for inclusion that I understood and connected with, so I researched other resources. “Inclusion is a call to action within the workforce that means actively involving every employee’s ideas, knowledge, perspectives, approaches, and styles to maximize business success.” (Shirley Engelmeier, 2012, as quoted in an interview to Forbes). As per the catalyst report employees feel included when they experience ‘uniqueness’ and ‘belonging’. When employees feel unique and that they belong, they report feeling team oriented and innovative. When they feel excluded or devalued, it might compromise job performance and satisfaction.
I am fortunate to work in a field that has a significant female representation. This is particularly the case in my organization; most of the staff in my clinic is female, and there seems to be proportionate representation in leadership. Healthcare in my opinion is one of the fields where gender bias is not as predominant as in some other fields. I believe another field where the gender representation is more or less balanced is education. I confess that this is my anecdotal experience, and not supported by data. This in fact was disproved after I read the article provided by our prof in her update- “even in culturally feminine settings such as nursing, librarianship, elementary education, and social work (all specifically studied by sociologist Christine Williams), men ascend to supervisory and administrative positions more quickly than women”. (Eagly & Carli, 2007). This was indeed an eye opener for me! I stand corrected, and humbled.
I will list a few of the things that I think any workplace would benefit from having in place, to foster sense of belonging amongst women-
-educate and train leaders and employees about gender based bias and prejudice.
-promote opportunities for women to bring up their concerns without fear of retaliation, especially if the leadership is male predominant.
-provide opportunities for flexible work hours, or work-from-home options where applicable.
-adopt family friendly policies for women with families, especially younger families.
-peer mentorship.
-non punitive culture towards women in relation to pregnancy and maternity related issues.
-consider allowing women of child bearing age and women with young children a few more days of leave (I say this with some trepidation, as I am sure this could open the doors to a plethora of other questions and concerns, and could be construed as biased in itself)
Following are some ideas that the Catalyst report enlists to improve overall employee sense of inclusion:
“-pay attention to the human elements.( Travis & Pollack)
-monitor progress and communicate with employees.
-have one to one meetings, seek feedback.
-role model inclusive behavior.
-avoid making jokes about a particular demographic.
-make inclusion visible to employees.
-be liberal in giving credit.”
There were some very valuable suggestions by Eagly & Carli (2007), to help navigate ‘the labyrinth’. These are more applicable to our previous activity, but I will mention it here since I read this article after I had posted my blog for the first activity-I quote from the article:
“-Increase people’s awareness of the psychological drivers of prejudice toward female leaders, and work to dispel those perceptions.
-Change the long-hours norm.
-Reduce the subjectivity of performance evaluation.
-Use open-recruitment tools, such as advertising and employment agencies, rather than relying on informal social networks and referrals to fill positions.
-Ensure a critical mass of women in executive positions—not just one or two women—to head off the problems that come with tokenism.
-Avoid having a sole female member of any team.
-Help shore up social capital.
-Prepare women for line management with appropriately demanding assignments.
-Establish family-friendly human resources practices.
-Allow employees who have significant parental responsibility more time to prove themselves worthy of promotion.
-Welcome women back.
-Encourage male participation in family-friendly benefits.”
I will close by mentioning a few other noteworthy points from the Catalyst Report. As per them inclusion and exclusion co-exist in the workplace. Inclusion is usually invisible, and exclusion is more obvious, or ‘salient’ as the authors call it.They also point out that there is a common perception that diversity is synonymous with inclusion, whereas this is infact not the case.
References:
Eagly, A. & Carli, L.L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review.
Great strategies for inclusion, I felt that I especially need to remember the following:
-promote opportunities for women to bring up their concerns without fear of retaliation, especially if the leadership is male predominant.
-consider allowing women of child bearing age and women with young children a few more days of leave (this especially dear to me as my wife is pregnant). Along those lines Canada has just implemented an 18 month mat leave option, though it merely spreads the funds from a 12month mat leave over 18 months, it does provide more protected time off for new mother and fathers.
“They also point out that there is a common perception that diversity is synonymous with inclusion, whereas this is infact not the case.”
I found this point interesting but would love some more clarity on what you mean when you say it is not the case. I think I know what you mean but don’t want to presume.