|
 LEADERSHIP
AND THE SEXES: USING GENDER SCIENCE TO CREATE SUCCESS IN BUSINESS, is a book by Michael Gurian and Barbara
Annis. To learn more about the book please
click here.
 Misinterpreting
Gender Differences: A Recipe For Organizational Failure
Date:
May 10 2008
Adapted by Michael Gurian and Barbara Annis from LEADERSHIP
AND THE SEXES: USING GENDER SCIENCE TO CREATE SUCCESS IN BUSINESS
(Jossey-Bass/John Wiley, September 2008)
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 phys icality 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.
END BOX
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 a nd 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 approac h. 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, an d 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 bac k 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 an y 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.
 Watch
Video
of Michael Gurian Speaking:
|
|
