Putnam-1
Current Issues: Gender Issues, Management Style, Mobility, and Harassment
SPCH 3309—Chapter 10
The Entrance of Women into the Workplace
Growing in numbers and expected to continue growing. The reality is that women are
becoming key employees in organizations; and not only in pure numbers. We have had
women hired (Carly Fiorina of Hewlett-Packard) and fired (same person) as CEO’s of
Fortune 500 companies. There is every reason to believe this will continue, but probably at
a slower rate than with men.
Women in Management: Slowly growing, but growing nonetheless. Not surprisingly, men
comprise the largest percentage of management positions; even true in organizations where
women exceed men in total numbers of employees.
Sex Segregation of Occupations: Certain professions are represented more by women or by
men; depending on the profession. Whether this is good or bad is open to opinion. Each
sex is going to be over or under-represented in certain professions. Is it desirable to seek an
even distribution or are we smarter to just let the natural course of actions dictate who goes
into what professions?
Salary Differences: Still a discrepancy but getting closer to equal pay for equal work.
Feminization of Occupations: Agree or disagree that the prestige (and salary) of a
profession goes down as more women enter that field of employment. Text notes Public
Relations as one such example. As time goes by we see a blending of such factors in this
country. In other words, the strict lines of what is and what is a man’s or woman’s
profession is much less today than it has been in the past.
The Glass Ceiling: The metaphor for explaining the invisible barrier that prevents women
from rising as fast as men do within the corporate hierarchy. Reasons/Causes offered for its
existence:
1. The Pipeline Theory—it takes time for results to emerge as participants must go
through a long process of climbing the corporate ladder.
2. The homogeneity principle—we tend to surround ourselves with people who look
and act like us.
3. The growth of part-time work—unless we are fully employed anywhere,
opportunities for advancement are extremely limited.
4. The growth of self-employment—up until recent years this aspect of employment for
women has grown considerably.
5. Role models or mentors are more limited for women—unless we have someone to
“show us the ropes” are apt to lag behind others.
6. Personal choices of balancing work and family life—many people (not just women)
have to make decisions as to where their priorities lie. Felice Schwartz created some
controversy pro and con with her urging of a “mommy track” be created for women.
7. Overt or subtle discrimination—we certainly hope this is much less today than in the
past but to assume all evaluate people by their abilities as opposed to their gender is
unfortunately naïve.
Putnam-2
Gender and Organizational Culture:
As we know from an earlier chapter, culture is shaped by those who live in it. And for
organizations that has been primarily males. Metaphors (relating to sports and
war)behavior reflect this in most businesses today. As women assimilate into organizations
they learn to adapt to the norms.
Feminine Organizational Cultures:
Karsten says that such a culture would include an absence of hierarchy; it would involve
participative decision-making with few rules…and would reflect lateral communication,
making interaction as a way to manage conflict. We would also see flexible schedules…etc.
The question is this: Is this doable? Is it practical? Is it desirable? And why can’t this exist
for a masculine culture as well?
Perception of Women Managers:
 Research says that most people prefer working for male managers and have more
positive perceptions of male managers…but that is just a general finding. (this
research comes from anywhere between 14-17 years ago…still true today or not?)
 Another study found that even liberal women reported that they felt less comfortable
working for female-led groups than male-led groups (again…14 yrs old).
 Why do people perceive women this way? Many factors but certainly unfair
stereotypes of women and the fear of change; fear of the unknown cannot be
ignored. Even Denise Quinn has said that she faced barriers based on the
perceptions that her career could only go so far.
Behavioral Expectations for Women Managers:
Women are often faced with the two-edged sword. They are often expected to be tough
and independent yet also feminine. Balancing masculinity with femininity is not easy and
likely unfair to expect this. Obviously, male managers operate under a different set of
expectations. Research suggests that most employees want their male managers to be
masculine in style and women bosses to be feminine in theirs. Women are expected to be
feminine in many respects but also blend into an organizational environment that historically
has rewarded and recognized those with masculine managerial styles—competence,
aggression, and independence. When women do not conform to this expectation they
usually are negatively viewed—seen as hostile, and disliked. This is changing, getting better.
But may well be a no-win for some women in certain businesses.
Evaluations of Male and Female Managers:
Research results are mixed here. Some studies show that men are judged more favorably
than are women for the same performance. Yet other studies show the men and women
are evaluated pretty much the same—fairly. Field studies tend to see women and men as
being evaluated equally and this is good since field studies are more likely to be realistic
than lab experiments. In sum, there is probably “some” bias in evaluating men and women
managers with men getting the somewhat more favorable treatment. But whatever
difference has existed in the past seems to be fading away as time passes and more women
arrive in management.
Male and Female Managerial Behavior:
Putnam-3
This is a complex area and no single, simple answers. But we can arrive at some
tendencies that separate male from female managers in how they behave.
1. Behavioral Differences—In some instances we see men aspire to management jobs
more than women; men sometimes have a greater momentum to reach higher levels
in management. This may be due to historical/family issues, but certainly not true
for all men and women. Leadership styles seem to be such that men are more likely
to be autocratic in style, women more democratic. Women are more
transformational and interpersonal in style, while men are more traditional in their
command-and-control behaviors. Women are often comfortable in role that calls for
them to collaborate, share power, communicate. Men often prefer to take charge,
direct, and be unilateral. In short, women are often more interpersonally
cooperative and men are more communicatively direct. What is important is realizing
that no one style is inherently better or worse. Certainly it is typically better to be
democratic than autocratic, but not always. What is vital is that men and women be
able to adjust their styles when needed.
2. Behavioral Similarities—Some studies, however, fine no differences; male and female
managers both want the same thing and behave in similar manners to get it.
Gender and Mentoring:
Women have fewer mentors than do men, largely because there are fewer women
managers who can serve as mentors. Men “can” be mentors but there are problems that
can arise. Such as issues of sex-discrimination, family, femininity and other women-related
issues in a more masculine organizational environment. Clearly more women mentors are
needed! Women tend to see mentors as being more friendship linked while men are more
apt to view this relationship as being a task-oriented alliance.
New Information on Mentoring (BusinessWeek Magazine, January 29, 2007)
 Companies are aggressively pursuing mentoring; about half of all of the Fortune 500
companies offer mentoring programs.
 Belief is that it encourages loyalty, diversity, and cohesion. If they are successful,
usually about one year is all that can be gotten from them. And then it’s time for
new experiences. Even then, there can remain a good, long-term relationship but
just one less dependent.
 Ideally, it benefits all involved. But it can be messy and disappointing in some
instances.
 One of the common problems lies in personal chemistry between the participants.
Might be something as basic as different body clocks, speaking styles, or schedules
of the people. Can all undermine the mentoring.
 In some cases it can be more serious if the person being mentored feels they are
being taught skills they wanted to cultivate.
 Or in some cases the mentor cannot accept the apprentice no longer needs them.
Almost like a parent seeing a child grow up---for some it can be very hard.
 In some cases the apprentice may try to get the mentor’s job. They may start to
see themselves as smarter, better, or more ambitious than their mentor and
undermine the mentoring they’ve gotten. Not that common, but unfortunately not
unheard of either.
Putnam-4
Gender and Networking:
This is a casual, informal line of communication in which much information may be
exchanged. Not to be underestimated as to its importance! Women may be excluded from
the “good old boy” network unless they have a mentor and can get their foot in this door.
Not surprisingly, we tend to casual interact with people like ourselves—men and women are
like here. Since there are fewer women managers, you can see the problem. But when
women do have mentors and can get into this network, they often have stronger
interpersonal skills that make it easier for them to develop and grow these contacts.
Women’s networks tend to be more socially oriented while men are more likely to see them
as more task-oriented in purpose or value.
Balancing Career and Family:
Both men and women face this issue, but historically it’s been women who have had the
toughest struggle. Women still carry the bulk of responsibility for family, children, household
duties (although this is changing), and consequently they typically face more pressure to
keep career and family in proper balance. More companies are conscious of this fact and
many are attempting to even the playing field, so to speak. But to assume the stress is
equally shared would be naïve. In the past, if a woman wanted a serious career in
management she could not have family. They “can” make it today, but it is still not easy.
Men, however, often benefit from having a family as historically this has been the norm for
moving up the corporate ladder.
Sexual Harassment in Organizations:
A very serious issue and any company who does not treat it as such will be facing many
lawsuits.

Definitions—EEOC guidelines give us a working definition. Key words or phrases are

Prevalence of Sexual Harassment—An uncomfortably large percentage of women

Targets of Sexual Harassment—Anyone can be a target of it, but the primary targets

The Profile of Harassers—In general, it is a man, older than his victim, often
“unwelcome behavior”; it can be either physical or verbal behavior; can be quid pro
quo—harassment is tied to job performance or opportunity, or an uncomfortable
work environment emerges due to the harassment.
have reported being harassed in some fashion, and even some men report the
same. While “any” harassment is too much, the fact it goes on in larger numbers
(smaller now than in the past) indicates that companies must remain vigilant in
combating it at all times.
tend to be younger women with a college degree. And the higher she is in the
corporate hierarchy, the more likely she will have been harassed at some point in
her career. Just why this is, is open to discussion and there are likely multiple
reasons for it.
married, likely a co-worker since there are more co-workers than there are
supervisors, and it is highly likely this person has harassed others before.
Putnam-5

Three Causes of Sexual Harassment—Typically a motive is for power than merely for

Male and Female Perceptions of Sexual Harassment—It is the target of the behavior

The Reasonable Woman Standard—This is the standard used to determine what is or
what is not harassment. For example, “would a reasonable woman working in this
sexual purposes. A way to intimidate, to threaten, to humiliate. This undue exercise
of power could come from supervisors or co-workers and may come in many forms.
Besides the desire for power, another cause is the so-called sex-role spillover theory.
This argues that some men are so conditioned to see women in specific ways, that
to see them in positions of authority or even just as professional co-worker is not
possible. They end up seeing them as sexual objects. Pretty lame excuse and totally
unacceptable in civilized society, but it may apply to some men. The third possible
cause for harassment relates to the general culture of communication between men
and women. The old ways of imbalance with me having more power and women
being a bit more submissive in their roles can contribute to attitudes in some where
harassment is acceptable. Again, totally unacceptable for any reason. It is up to the
organizations to create organizational cultures and climates where equally is the
norm and any hint of harassment will not be tolerated. No exceptions.
who decides if it is welcome or acceptable or if it is harassment. Not surprisingly,
men and women often disagree as to what is harassment. Women are much more
likely to find any such behavior as unacceptable while men often say they would be
flattered to be on the receiving end of such actions/behaviors.
organization find such behavior unwelcome and consequently sexual harassment?”

Communication Relationships between Harassers and Harassed—the Gutek study

Preventing Sexual Harassment—Companies take this very seriously. Almost every
showed that men who harass women rarely talked about a woman’s performance or
career with her. Instead, men like this talk about themselves, their personal lives,
and the woman’s personal appearance and clothing.
organization goes out of its way to ensure its employees know the rules. UTA does
this regularly and each year we are reminded about the rules. This is done for
everyone’s safety and no one should feel this is unfair. We all want to be respected
for our abilities and no one should ever feel uncomfortable going to work or being
around their supervisors or co-workers. There needs to be very clear guidelines of
how to behave and what to do if you are victimized by harassment.
Organizational Romance:
Very common for male and female workers to socialize outside the workplace.
We spend long hours in close proximity, it is not surprising that women and men will
sometimes starting dating and see each other in a romantic light. As natural as it is for men
and women to be attracted to each other, there is often problems and concerns associated
with doing it in the work organizational environment. Consequently, businesses often try to
have policies or plans to deal with this reality.
 Attitudes toward Organizational Romance—Businesses grapple with this with respect
how to treat it (more later). But women tend to be less thrilled with it and less open
toward it than are men. Are you surprised?
Putnam-6


Effects of Organizational Romance—Can be positive or negative. Negative results in
the form of less productivity and a negative attitude can occur when the relationship
goes sour and it boils over to the work environment. Also, other workers may see
double-standards and sometimes jealousy. But when this works, productivity can rise
and interpersonal relationships amongst many can improve. Typically the romances
involve higher-ranking men with lower-ranking women in the organization.
Organizational Strategies for Dealing with Organizational Romance— Managers
cannot afford to ignore this reality. Nor does a company want to take a hard “no
dating” line for few of how hard it would be to enforce. Workers must be aware that
they are responsible for their behavior and if they choose to date, they must do so in
a manner that will not negatively impact the company.
Gender Organizations and the Future:
We are seeing more companies look for creative and flexible ways to allow employees to
work—at home or in the office. Varied times (4-day weeks at 10 hours per day) and other
options for starting, ending and where the work is done. The democratic style of
management, more people-skills and collaborative work efforts are more the norm than the
exception. All of which tend to be more female oriented in style than male. Working in
teams has been growing for some time. This decentralized approach often works well with
female communication behaviors.
Miscellaneous: Other Current Issues:
1. Napping on the job. While many students are familiar with this in the classroom, it
has seldom been recommended for doing it on the job. Cornell University
psychologist, James Maas coined then phrase “power nap” and says that companies
are beginning to embrace this idea. Nike is one such company that encourages
employees to add this mid-day short break to their working hours. And sleep
scientist Sara Mednick applauds this concept, saying that napping (about 20 minutes
between 1-3 pm for the average work day) can enhance your productivity. She says
without sleep you don’t learn and it’s difficult to sustain productivity. Short naps can
add back that productivity deprived at night.
2. Reducing E-Mail. A few maverick companies are taking steps to reduce the amount
of e-mail use. The reason is not due to so much spam or stuffed inboxes. Nor is it
the potential for legal liability. The concern, according to academics and
management scholars is that with e-mail you can easily misinterpret messages.
Additionally, it has become a substitute for the nuanced conversations that are
critical in the workplace. Author Daniel Goleman in his book “Social Intelligence” says
that business has undervalued the social dimension of communication. Research
says that only about half the users fully grasp the tone or intent of an e-mail, and
that most people vastly overestimate their ability to relay and comprehend messages
accurately. As a result, more face-to-face communication for some messages makes
more sense. The companies that have curbed e-mail to some degree see
improvement in problem-solving, teamwork, and happier customers. Face-to-face
should not replace all e-mail (still vital for large documents or when written
communication is vital), but do not think we have evolved to the point where
meeting face to face is no longer needed.