Tag: weekof8/2
Discussion 8/2
- In “Even at ‘Inclusive’ Companies, Women of Color Don’t Feel Supported”, by Beth A. Livingston and Tina R. Opie, the importance of connections between women of varying ethnicities/race in the workplace is examined. Through “shared sisterhood”, women can come together to “design strategies, dismantle structures that prevent advancement, or even just offer mutual support” (Livingston & Opie, p,1). However, due to the exclusionary attitudes and tone-deaf conversations, women of color are less likely to be emotionally vulnerable in the workplace. This hesitation to be open with another suppresses professional growth and productivity. After conducting a survey, the authors concluded that connections are unlikely to form until organizations recognize and address biases within.
2. This article is hyperlinked to “emotional labor and taxation” in Wynn’s article. This phrase appears under one of the solutions (minimizing microaggressions) to create organizational change. This article is useful because it expands further than providing a simple explanation. In this piece, relevant research to emotional struggles in the workplace has been conducted and questions have been posed. I would like to personally research this topic further because it is an area I have never given much consideration.
I think white people would benefit from reading this article because it explains how even if an organization is labeled as “inclusive” that does not mean the work towards equity ends there. Additionally, I think that managers/executive positions would benefit from reading this because they are supervising behavior and setting the tone for the workplace. Additionally, I think women of color should read his because it encourages connections even if it is challenging.
An excerpt for managers/executive positions:
“You can’t build meaningful connections between women of different races and ethnicities, let alone ask them to advocate for their collective advancement, if black and Hispanic women report being excluded from the relationships required to make an organization run.”
https://hbr.org/2019/08/even-at-inclusive-companies-women-of-color-dont-feel-supported
Research Portfolio
Discussions / Homework Week of 8/2
Response # 1
As the title implies, the article “Why Most Performance Evaluations are Biased, and How to Fix Them” by Lori Nishiura Mackenzie, JoAnne Wehner, and Shelly J. Correll, imparts some solid advice. Nishiura, et. al, researchers at the Stanford VMWare Women’s Leadership Lab, conducted studies of performance review procedures at three U.S. companies. These studies revealed patterns of ambiguity in evaluations for women. Research has shown that ambiguity or vagueness in procedure leads to implicit bias on performance reviews. It turns out that the most problematic area filled out on a performance assessment was the “open box” area where a manager can write the answer to an open-ended question like “Describe the ways the employee’s performance met your expectations.” The authors report that ambiguous questions like that often illicit a biased answer. The reasoning is that since there are no clearly established parameters in which to judge if the employee met expectations, managers fall back on their perceptions of the employee’s gender, race or other identity information to answer the question. Nishiura, et. al, offer several solutions to “constrain” the open box. They recommend creating a checklist to refer to when filling in boxes. That way, managers are consistently using the same criteria for all of their employees. Another key suggestion was for managers to establish a rubric by which employees will be evaluated by before the performance review. This ensures that the manager is basing their evaluation on actual evidence, not subjective feelings. Overall, this article is invaluable to anyone who is working. Afterall, every one of us will be evaluated and some of us will also be providing evaluations. As a side note, several of the managers written about in the article were relieved to finally have some structure and uniformity in the review process because they wanted to be fair but didn’t know how to. This piece provides an expanded lens in which to see how one of Alison Wynn’s six stages of the “employee life-cycle” in the “The Gender Policy Report” has a domino effect on what comes after performance reviews – Pay, Promotion and Termination Decisions, the crux of inequality issues for women and underrepresented groups.
Response # 2
I think company leaders would benefit most from reading Alison Wynn’s “The Gender Policy Report”. Wynn, a Research Associate at the Stanford VMWare Women’s Leadership Lab, puts forward several meaningful strategies for handling inequality in the workplace. Ms. Wynn has surely been successful in catching the eye of company executives when she states, “It may be easier to think of individualistic solutions—such as training ourselves to think differently and change our own behavior—or to blame larger societal forces we can’t control, rather than to change the intricate organizational procedures and practices that contribute to employment outcomes in complex ways. However, my research suggests that we must address organizational forms of inequality as well.” In this sentence, the author goes out of her way to include statements that reflect how executives she examined in a year-long case study understood what constituted inequality in an organization. It most likely will cause executives’ interest to be piqued and to wonder what Wynn’s suggestions are because they mistakenly thought they were already doing everything they could to reduce inequality.
Discussion Questions Week of 8/2
Response to #1
In “Is Redemption Possible in the Aftermath of #MeToo” by Tovia Smith, a reporter at NPR, difficult questions regarding the reintegration of men who are accused of being predators and a part of the #MeToo movement are examined. The author notes that it has been two years since the #MeToo movement began to gain media attention as a result of Harvey Weinstein and stated that it is time to question whether or not some individuals are worthy of returning to society.
Smith presents the question of when the men guilty of their crimes should be allowed back into society. Through interviewing activists like Taran Burke, lawyers, and ethicists, Smith presents a compelling argument of what needs to be further examined. To eliminate sexual violence in the workplace, we must focus on undoing the harm that the perpetrators have accomplished. Undoing their harm, according to others can only be accomplished through rehabilitation and reintegration into society. Determining whether or not these individuals can return to society depends on the gravity of the crime at hand. Various elements such as the seriousness of the offense, sincerity of the apology, and restitution to the victims are just some things that need to be examined.
This question that Smith presents to the reader is an extremely valuable one. In a world where one scandal replaces the next, it is important to understand that the perpetrators of sexual crimes in the workplace these past two years cannot be let off the hook. Factors that determine whether or not these individuals are still menaces in society must be examined, as not everyone can be rehabilitated. The article however states that through therapy and rehabilitation, change is possible, and we need to aim to reintegrate these individuals into society. This thankfully is not as easy as it seems. Organizations understand the weight that the #MeToo movement carries and the reputations that these perpetrators carry around with them. Therefore, it isn’t easy and most of them won’t be able to obtain a job that they previously held due to questions surrounding the organization’s reputation and liability.
This source adds a tremendous amount of value to Wynn’s article. The article “Individual Change Won’t Create Gender Equality in Organizations” addresses the issue of female underrepresentation in the tech industry, with only 25% of jobs being held by women. The toxic workplace culture creates an environment that does not support female leaders, instead, fostering one where sexual harassment is deemed somewhat normal. Along with this, the article examines the idea that change doesn’t occur on an individual level, however, a transition into a workplace that promotes equality can only be accomplished through organizational change. Smith’s article on the #MeToo movement examines what steps society needs to take as a whole towards rehabilitating perpetrators. It is not something that can only be accomplished by themselves, rather the justice system, therapists, the perpetrators, and regular individuals need to recognize the role that they have in creating an environment that does not tolerate SA.
Both articles, in summary, recognize that change needs to happen on a larger scale. Changing one individual through classes does not promote change. Changing the way that society as a whole approach various issues creates long-term change and hopefully prevents incidents like this from occurring in the future or being seen as normal.
Response to #2
Leaders who want to gain a new perspective on how to promote positive change in their organization would benefit the most from Wynn’s article. This includes HR reps (more specifically, talent acquisition groups), managers, and people who have the ability to act to change their organization. This includes CEOs and COOs. Wynn wants the steps and the issues addressed within the article to be applied to every industry, as she believes that the framework can be applied to every organization to promote equality.
HR reps are an important target group for this article because for the steps that she lays out for organizational change, they are all directed towards HR responsibilities. For the first two elements, recruiting and hiring, those are often done by the talent acquisition department which is why I stated that they are a more specific target audience than just HR representatives. Giving HR representatives clear, well laid out steps on how to approach the issue of equality in the workplace allows for HR to address equality in the workplace. Furthermore, Wynn addresses that organizations not only pursue equality related to gender, but for all types.
One of the main points that Wynn also makes in her article is the idea that we cannot blame society, or ourselves, for all causes of inequality, as “It may be easier to think of individualistic solutions- such as training ourselves to think differently and change our own behavior- or to blame larger societal forces we can’t control, rather than to change the intricate organizational procedures and practices that contribute to employment outcomes in complex ways. However, my research suggests that we must address organizational forms of inequality as well” . This is where she targets CEOs, COOs, and managers as well.
It is important that in the leadership positions in the organization accept fault on areas where they are lacking or fail to live up to expectations on equality. In order to promote change within the organization, understanding the shortcomings of the organizations will prove critical in creating the change necessary to create for an equal opportunity, safe environment. Managers that recognize their organizations lack equality are able to create an environment where change is possible. They have the ability to control the way that the organization approaches issues of equality or procedures. This is why I believe that she is mainly targeting leaders within the organization, because they have the ability to change the organizations procedures, and culture.
If you really think about the message that Wynn is trying to send to the reader, she is really just targeting anyone that is a part of an organization. She recognizes that although one person might not spark change in an organization, if you have a collective group of people within that organization that promote the idea of changing certain procedures, then an organization may be able to change. Therefore, Wynn is targeting pretty much anyone that is in an organization in my opinion.
Discussion Questions Week of 8/2
Response to #1
In “Research: Vague Feedback is Holding Women Back,” Shelley J. Correll and Caroline Simard identify a major problem in the employee performance evaluation process that is making it harder for women to advance into upper-level management roles. The authors are associated with the VMWare Women’s Leadership Innovation Lab at Stanford University, where they conducted a study of performance evaluations at several high-tech companies. They found a noticeable difference between the way men and women received feedback on their performance. It turns out, men receive much more specific and detailed information about their performance than women, who tend to receive feedback in more general and vague ways. The authors hypothesize that because men receive critical and concrete feedback, they can make specific and measurable adjustments that demonstrate improvement. In contrast, because women tend to receive vague feedback along the lines of “people like working with you” or “you had a great year,” they do not have a chance to make adjustments that will demonstrate improvements in performance. Additionally, when women did receive specific feedback, it tended to relate to their communications style rather than ways to develop technical expertise that would help them advance. I found it interesting that nowhere in the article did it state that male reviewers were more likely to give these types of biased performance reviews, which I took to mean that female managers are also perpetuating the problem.
As a result of these findings, Correll and Simard make several recommendations to help managers give better feedback to women and level the playing field, such as setting a goal to discuss three specific business outcomes with each employee, avoiding vague language and praise, and striving to write reviews of the same length for all employees. In sum, providing actionable feedback is the key.
The Correll and Simard article supports Alison Wynn’s article in a couple of ways. Because Wynn’s article provides only a high-level overview of areas in the employee life cycle where organizations can improve gender equality, she does not go into depth in any specific area. The Correll and Simard article provides a rationale for making improvements to the performance evaluation process as well as recommendations for how to go about doing it. Correll and Simard can also devote more space to defining a “vague” evaluation and the ramifications. I found the link to the supporting article to be an effective way for Wynn to offer more details to readers who wanted them, without detracting from her overall goals.
Response to #2
In “Individual Change Won’t Create Gender Equality in Organizations,” Alison Wynn explores an issue that I have questioned for some time. Can we expect organizations to bear the burden of changing the people who work there? Or should an organization focus on the changing things it can control, like policies and processes? Based on her research studies, she argues that organizations are more likely to create change by focusing on the organization itself. After reading her article, I would say I definitely agree.
Wynn is targeting executives and leaders of organizations with this message. When she writes: “The executives in my sample trended toward two primary explanations for inequality: placing responsibility on individual men and/or women, and blaming the larger society,” she not only reveals her intended audience but also raises an important point. When people get asked about a complex problem, they often talk in a way to justify or rationalize why the problem exists instead of talking about ways to fix it. In a way, this type of reaction is a defense of the status quo and deflects the issue away from the responsible parties. If there’s any group that has the power to change the status quo in an organization, it’s the organization’s leaders. So I’m glad to see her directly address them in this way. Additionally, the framework for change that she recommends offers very practical advice that is not too difficult or disruptive for executives to implement. In a way, she is saying that a lot of small changes can result in a big improvement in gender equality overall.
Discussion Questions Week 8/2
Question 1
In the journal article “Women are Working more than ever, but they still take on most Household Responsibilities” Maggie Germano explores the responsibilities that women take on in addition to their job. She explains that while women have definitely gained more equality in the workplace than we had 50 years ago, we have yet to achieve true equality in the workplace and in more places than just the office. Germano gives statistics and discusses how women are treated differently in the workplace in regards to their lives at home. Having children, caring for sick and/or elderly family members both are most likely taken care of by the women in the relationship and therefore their jobs are affected.
The value in this article is that it is drawing attention to how much women do in a day and how their jobs and income is negatively affected by it. Why should a women be penalized for having a child if it does not affect how much work they do or how they do it? Why do men not get penalized as much for the same thing? Germano makes these points in ways that are not attacking or accusing businesses or companies but simply pointing out that these practices are unfair and need to be changed. This adds an example to Wynn’s point in her article “Individual Change Won’t Create Gender Equality in Organizations”. It is supporting her ideas and giving evidence to her argument.
Question 2
Alison Wynn’s article “Individual Change Won’t Create Gender Equality in Organizations” discusses the idea that individuals are not enough to fix gender inequality in the workplace. She identifies different ways that employees can work together to dissolve inequality in their company and offices. I think that all men would benefit the most from reading her article, not just men who have authority or are higher up at their company but all of them. I believe so because those are the people who are participating in inequality. They are the ones who are sexually harassing and discriminating against women. Are they the only ones, most likely not. Unfortunately, there most likely are women who discriminate against other women. But men are the rings leaders of it all and by changing their behaviors, women will be more comfortable in the office.
I liked the question that she posed in the beginning of the article, “If you were an executive tasked with reducing gender inequality in your organization, how would you do it?”. I think that this is a good question for everyone to ask themselves when hearing about gender inequality, or all kinds for that matter. I think that there are definitely people, especially men, who participate in gender equality without particularly realizing it. If they all asked themselves Wynn’s question, their actions might come to light in their minds. They could point out things that should be done to fix inequality and along the way realize ways that they have been making it worse.
Discussion Questions Week of 8/2
Response to #1
In the journal article, “Individual Change Won’t Create Gender Equality in Organizations,” written by Alison Wynn, a critical point is brought up regarding holding decision-makers accountable for reducing gender inequality within an organization. In Emilio J. Castilla’s article, she explores this idea. Castilla proposes that being more transparent when making pay decisions would reduce the pay gap by employee gender, race, and “foreign nationality.” Castilla delves into her study of reward decisions in the workplace, where she notes the introduction of new organizational procedures, accountability, and transparency has affected almost 9,000 employees positively. Before this, however, there was a large gap in “performance-based rewards” that resulted in unfairness towards women, who could also be ethnic minorities. They also received less money than men, who also happened to be citizens of the United States. Castilla notes that after attaining accountability and transparency, however, this gap was reduced.
I believe this approach is crucial for reducing gender inequality within organizations, and it adds to Wynn’s article perfectly because one wrong turn when it comes to being accountable and unbiased can cause vast marginalized intersectionality. When decision-makers decide to be biased and pay White men more, for example, women are oppressed. First, women are oppressed, but racist bias is brought into the picture when ethnic women are oppressed. Multiple biases then co-exist, backtracking greatly when it comes to reducing inequality. Although Castilla’s proposal initially involves gender inequality, it also simultaneously involves racial inequality as well. Many intersectional components of marginalization can be reversed when decision-makers are trained to be more transparent. By starting within an organization, employees and bosses can really look inward and not blame a larger picture for an easy “out.
Response to #2
In Wynn’s article, “Individual Change Won’t Create Gender Equality in Organizations,” I believe an employee or a person soon to have a higher position within a company would benefit the most from reading this article. I do not believe Wynn’s article is vague at all. Still, if it were directed towards executives within an organization, her tone would be more analytical, presenting more data and evidence that executives would understand. Wynn also subtly hints at a larger picture through her writing. People can not simply acknowledge that they are “good” but work together to change the structures that ultimately increase gender inequality. As cliché as it sounds, working together towards specific issues is crucial, and Wynn laid out these issues perfectly. Although not specifically written, I believe one of Wynn’s main points is that there needs to be a framework for an issue, or else people are not able to see the issue. In a TED talk I recently watched, Kimberlé Crenshaw said just this. If there is no framework (for example, a commonly seen issue regarding police violence against women), there is no priority for the injustice.
I believe Wynn is trying to open the eyes of future employees or new employees ahead of time. Although she focuses on gender inequality within the workplace, Wynn tries to set up solutions and a framework for all inequalities. Wynn notes, “These recommendations can help fight bias and inequality on many dimensions, beyond just gender. While my research specifically focused on a gender equality initiative, similar research must be done examining other types of initiatives to ensure organizations can address all types of inequalities.” To effectively create change, people must address and acknowledge the most marginalized first, prioritize them, set a framework for change, and carry this mindset onto other injustices. This quote works for the audience I have mentioned because it introduces a certain demeanor for young adults that regard future change towards equality.
Research Portfolio- Caitlin
Sherri Holmes Research Portfolio
When preparing my portfolio, I sought to include sources that supported my goal of providing meaningful suggestions and dialogue on how to make workplaces more equitable and inclusive of Black workers. Despite my initial resistance to using the SU library databases, ultimately, I found more articles than anticipated on this topic. As a matter of fact, on several occasions, one article led to another and so on. I didn’t necessarily decide in an orderly fashion as to what I would need, rather as I saw what kind of information was available, it informed what direction my research would take. I knew that I needed to explain why America is in this space of devaluing Black people’s labor and disrespecting our humanity with micro and macroaggressions. I realized I would need a source that provided historical context on Black labor in the U.S., which serves as a foundation for understanding how Black workers are perceived today. I knew that data showing statistics on the state of Black employment trends would align with many Black people’s experiences, therefore validating them. Then I thought it was imperative for people to understand how it feels to be a Black person in the workplace, so I’ve included sources that detail personal recollections of Black people’s experiences at work. Later after doing some of the research portfolio exercises, I realized I needed information from the opposition detailing how they might feel about diversity and inclusion initiatives. Finally, it was of course necessary to include sources that provided an answer to my research question – what are solutions for being inclusive and equitable to Black workers? This is a topic close to my heart because I have both experienced and seen in others the consequences of lack of equity and inclusion. Black people have contributed so much to this country and to its economy. We deserve better.