|
 Article: Misinterpreting Gender
Differences: A Recipe For Organizational Failure
This
article, adapted from Leadership and the Sexes, by Michael Gurian with
Barbara Annis, appeared on HR.com, and was sent out in 135,000
newsletter subscribers.
LEADERSHIP
AND THE SEXES: USING GENDER SCIENCE TO CREATE SUCCESS IN BUSINESS,
is a book by Michael Gurian with Barbara
Annis. (Jossey-Bass/John
Wiley, September 2008.) To learn more about the book please
click here.
When
ineffective communication transpires between women and men, it can
profoundly affect a corporate culture. It can lead to millions of
dollars of organizational failure—mainly in the loss of talent. Not
only does an individual woman or man leave the company (after the
company invested millions in the person), but the company’s culture
becomes known for gender discomfort.
A helpful tool, recently
being refined for corporate use, is brain science regarding gender. The
use of this “gender science” by managers has become possible because
now we can look into the brains of women and men to create tools for
understanding one another. For companies like IBM, Deloitte &
Touche, PriceWaterHouse Coopers, Brooks Sports, and others, gender
misinterpretations have diminished considerably, leading to better
competitive edge and bottom line profits. After training its managers
in brain-based gender differences, for instance, Deloitte &
Touche
saw such an immediate rise in workplace comfort, especially among women
managers, that the company estimates it saved $250 million dollars in
lost talent.
Thinking about gender through a brain-based lens
can take a moment of managerial readjustment. For decades, we’ve
thought of gender as something that was mainly socialized. It certainly
is, but scientists have also found over 100 structural differences
between men’s and women’s brains. Not surprisingly, these differences
can create miscommunication. PET and SPECT scans of the male and female
brain show the brains look quite different from one another!
Did you know? Our brains are
different
*Women’s brains tend
to have 15 – 20 percent more blood flow at any given moment than men’s
brains.
*In
women’s brains, language tends to occur in both the left and right
hemisphere; in men’s brains, language tends to occur only in the left.
When reading, writing and speaking are all factored in, women tend to
use more words than men in a day.
*In women’s brains, there are
more active sensorial and emotive centers, and better linkage of these
centers to language centers; men’s senses don’t generally work as well
as women’s, men don’t process as much emotion, and men don’t tend to
link as much complex emotion or sensorial detail to words.
*In
men’s brain, the cerebellum tends to be larger than in the female
brain. The cerebellum is an action and physical movement center in the
brain; thus, men tend to communicate more nonverbally, with more
emphasis on movement and physicality than women’s emphasis on words.
*Men’s
brain enter a ‘rest state,’ a zone out state, more easily than
women’s—this happens many times per day naturally for men
(comparatively, women’s brains do not shut off in this way except in
sleep); men’s brains also enter a rest state when quantities of words
become overwhelming during communication.
*Men’s brains circulate
more testosterone than women’s, as compared to women’s greater neural
emphasis on oxytocin. Testosterone is a competition/aggression
chemical. Oxytocin is a bonding chemical. Quite often during a
communication, a man will try to compete while a woman tries to bond.
Focusing on verbal communication
The
brain differences in the box are the tip of the iceberg, but if you
think about verbal communications for a moment, you might immediately
have some “Ahas” about your communication with the other gender.
A
powerful illustration is a meeting of your managerial team. If, for
instance, a woman leads the meeting, there may be more discussion, more
words used, more interest in emotive, sensorial and relational detail.
If a man leads the meeting, it may be shorter, and not as immersed in
relational details.
If a conflict situation should emerge in
the meeting, the men in the room may become louder and more competitive
as their chosen method of resolving the conflict. Their testosterone
level increases with the increase in their stress hormone (cortisol)
and their adrenalin.
The women may become quieter and may try to
find ways to keep equilibrium and relationships intact, rather than
edgy with competition. Women’s oxytocin levels increase with the
increase in their stress hormone and adrenalin.
Some women of
course are quite competitive and loud, some men quite soft-spoken and
noncompetitive. The fact that exceptions exist in every environment
does actually helps prove the rule--most women and men notice (without
realizing the brain science) that men and women are having different
experiences together.
Successful organizational change
Once
managers learn about brain differences, they look at management and
supervision, meetings and alliances, work life and even home life
differently. As they interact with the other gender, women (or men) who
use a lot of words begin to watch carefully for the male “eyes glazing
over” look. Men come to notice how women are trying to help an
interaction with their oxytocin-based and word-based relational
approach. They also curtail interruption and target their
competitiveness to individuals who seem game to relate that way. They
don’t impose their aggression on people, both women and men, who are
withdrawing from the corporate culture because the aggression level is
unnecessarily high.
Men and women also come to see their roles
as managers in deeper ways, especially when working with the other
gender. Here are two case studies (names have been changed) that
illustrate both possible misinterpretations, and successful
organizational change.
A
case study: a female manager with a male employee
In
the first case, a female supervisor has the task of providing the
annual performance review for “Ralph.” Ralph has completed nine great
projects and had one major mess up.
She begins the session by
asking Ralph how the wife and kids are, did they enjoy their vacation
to Yellowstone, and how his mom is recovering from her stroke. She is
instinctively showing that she cares about Ralph and wants to create
relational harmony before proceeding. She doesn’t notice that Ralph is
squirming in his chair or nonverbally signaling discomfort with eyes
glazing over.
Ralph’s brain is working differently than hers.
Ralph wants to know as quickly as possible where he stands in the
company hierarchy of competitive risk and achievement. He will respect
his manager more if she acknowledges his good work then gets to the
point. He needs to know exactly how he messed up (and both asking him
and telling him can be important). He then wants to know what resources
he needs to make sure he can successfully handle a similar project in
the future.
If Ralph says things like, “This mess up wasn’t my
fault, it was Joe’s (or Sarah’s),” his female supervisor may feel the
instinct to engage him on this point with a complex back and forth,
beginning with “Why do you say that?” and going into great detail for a
half hour. This may be necessary, and only you as a manager can decide
what is best, but it is also worth remembering that this
blaming-another may just be a quick defense/aggression response (Ralph
trying to keep his own competitive status intact); it is a common male
response, one natural to male testosterone, the male brain, and male
socialization, and it may well dissipate on its own within minutes of
your helping him do a better job in the future.
A case
study: a male manager with a female employee
In
this situation, a male supervisor is responsible for annual performance
review of a female staff member. During the past year “Jenny” has been
assigned 10 projects. She successfully completed 9 of them on time,
under budget, and generally did a great job. But assignment 10 was
different—it just didn’t work out.
Let’s say Jenny comes into
your office and sits down and you begin with: “Jenny, what happened to
this project? It really didn’t work.”
Jenny looks at you, and in
her mind she’s thinking, “I did 9 projects perfectly, and all he can
focus on is the one that had problems. I am absolutely not valued by
this company.” She’s won’t hear much of what you have to say after that.
Men
often don’t realize how important verbal encouragement is for all
people, especially women. As the performance review begins, the female
brain releases increased oxytocin in order to respond to the stress of
the review. The increased oxytocin stimulates and is stimulated by
words used and heard in verbal centers of the brain. Men often
misinterpret this as weakness or “she needs too much encouragement, I
don’t have time for that.” This is an error that can cost a company
millions of dollars in lost talent.
While any stereotyping is
counterproductive, and while a performance review can begin with
criticism and still succeed, in general, this kind of response will
work better. It’s not just a matter of “preference,” but of the human
brain at work: “Jenny, I’m impressed with your work on projects 1
through 9 this year. You showed a lot of initiative and represented the
company real well in these ways.” After Jenny responds, you might ask
questions like these and engage in responses: “What was different on
project 10? What needed to happen to make it as successful as 1-9? How
could I have helped?”
In this discussion, you have showed
appreciation, acknowledged the staff member for good work and become a
partner in helping work through the problem project. You opened the
door for her to come to you for help when she’s stuck—you’ve shown
understanding of all the details and content her mind is processing,
and this understanding shows crucial supportiveness.
We often
hear CEOs, leaders and managers say, “I know something’s going on
related to gender, and I know we could do better, but….” Often, the
corporation gets stuck in soft gender sensitivity trainings that don’t
get to the heart of what is going on, or in short pilots that can’t
really come to grips with deeply different ways the male and female
brain negotiate, communicate, do conflict, run meetings, and lead teams.
A
million years of brain development has walked into every workplace, and
the male and female brain have been developing on somewhat different
trajectories for that million years. Like our marriages, our workplaces
are gender-charged environments, and one of the most exciting things we
do as managers is explore, with depth, what is happening in the female
and male brain.
This website features the
Leadership and Gender trainings offered by Michael Gurian and his
associates. We are proud to offer the finest state-of-the-art
training and keynotes in
how men and women think, work and lead. New York Times
bestselling author Michael Gurian is one of the world's foremost
authorities in leadership and gender diversity. Working
together as women and men is one of the greatest challenges we will
each
meet--personally and in corporate environments. If the Gurian
Institute can help your workplace meet the challenge, please contact
us. If you specifically want Michael Gurian to provide
consulting, training or a keynote, please let us know as well. Click
here to learn more.
|
|
