Gender equality: it’s a question of respect

Over the years, the issue of gender equality in the job market has been addressed by analyzing various indicators that relate to men and women in the positions they hold in the workplace, the differences in their career advancement and the wage gap. Some specific examples: employment/unemployment rates; horizontal segregation, i.e. the number of women who hold positions as line managers or staff members; vertical segregation, expressed by the glass ceiling metaphor, when women are prevented from climbing the career ladder to the top, even when they have all the skills they need to get there; the pay gap, the difference between men and women in their annual gross earnings and relative benefits for jobs requiring the same skill set.

The causes of structural asymmetry, which still exist in the world and in the job market (and not only in Italy) can be attributed to several different factors. The first ties into the social organization of work, which reflects a traditional culture that is still prevalent today: the division of roles means women do twice the work as men (the housework as well as their paid jobs). Most people see this as a limitation on their availability in terms of working overtime or accepting transfers, and stigma is still strongly associated with maternity leave.

The second factor has to do with values and the behavioral styles which are manifested, selected and rewarded in the work environment by the dominant group, whose members place higher value on achievement, customer orientation, and a task-driven approach to work. This over skills centering on relationships, listening and inclusion which are typically associated with the feminine identity. The third factor relates to women’s fragility in interiorizing a leadership identity that is consistent with their personal values, without reverting to strategies of self-exclusion or imitation of the values and styles endorsed by the organizational culture (often unknowingly).

In addition to these more obvious and widely-debated issues, recently two more questions have emerged: on one hand the importance of support from men to advance the cause of women; on the other, the central role of the corporate climate with respect to micro-behaviors adopted on a daily basis in relationships between men and women that contribute to building the dominant culture.

The first question has to do with the people in power – i.e. men – being sponsors and champions of change. The second refers to micro-aggression: words and actions that are innately hostile or violent, even if this is masked or convoluted. These are often clichés, habitual gestures, or platitudes, often unconsciously enacted or verbalized, which demean other individuals or minority groups.

A recent Ipsos report provides a snapshot of the situation in Global views on acceptable behavior and equality in the workplace . This study, run in collaboration with the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College in London, addresses both of these last two questions and more generally frames the issue of respect in the workplace.

Beginning with quite a common view (56% of interviewees, the majority of whom were women, believe that there is indeed disparity in how men and women are treated), the differences emerged with regard to possible solutions: for 68% of interviewees (mostly women), gender equality should be realized through proactive efforts by men; 58% (again, mostly women) believe that this equality would be expediated if more women held leadership positions.

When researchers explored what are seen as “acceptable” behaviors in the workplace, the divergence between the perception of men and women is more obvious. For example, 13% of men think it is permissible to show material of a sexual nature at work (the percentage of women is 7%) and 28% are convinced that there is nothing wrong with telling dirty stories or jokes. What’s more, 46% of survey respondents say that they can ask a co-worker out on a date, and 15% of men think they’re entitled to keep asking even after they’ve been turned down.

It’s primarily men who assert that they would have no problem defending a colleague from micro-aggression (61% men vs 51% women), or responding to a senior colleague who made a sexist comment to a woman (53% men vs 48% women). In contrast, women feel more confident in calling out a junior colleague (59% men vs 57% women). These data highlight the fact that seniority and the power that comes with it play a key role in “normalizing” micro-aggressive behaviors. However, these same data could be interpreted in a more positive light, underscoring how seniority and the accompanying power could modify such behaviors by censuring them.

A final noteworthy finding relates to the reasons for the so-called glass ceiling. The principal impediment to career advancement for women has to do with conflicting childcare responsibilities (cited by 35% of the sample); the second, turning down a male colleague for a date (26%). This finding also highlights the fact that career advancement is not dependent on competencies or performance, but relationships and networking. Unfortunately, with reference to gender, these relationships can go beyond respect and politically correct behavior.

Gender equality: it’s a question of respect