If you are a woman and a manager, you’ve probably attended more meetings than you care to remember. And if these were mixed gender meetings, you’ve probably noticed some subtle differences in how these groups reacted to you compared to the males in the group. Past research has established that you are interrupted more often than men, you are chosen less often to be the leader, and are less active than the men in the group. Further, these groups see you as less influential, less effective as managers, with lower self-confidence and business skills, and less leadership ability.
And if you are a woman and a manager, and already know all this, then you undoubtedly have feelings about it, and you may already have taken some actions to ameliorate your situation. James Driskell, Beckett Olmstead, and Eduardo Salas, all from Florida, trained the careful eye of scientific research on your plight, and they discovered a way to help you. They also discovered a frequent mistake that you make that worsens your situation. They even found something to help men.
Driskell and his colleagues devised a straightforward test: which is more influential, competence or dominance based on threat? They showed video tapes of a woman and a man each trying to influence the viewer to act in accordance with his/her wishes. All tapes used the same persuasive arguments, but the man and woman varied the way they spoke.
As dominating persuaders, they spoke in loud, tense voices, their foreheads knitted into a scowl. They glared, their muscles were tense, and they pointed and used intrusive gestures. Their manner threatened the viewer and their emotions were high.
As competent persuaders, they spoke quickly with a steady gaze and clear, fluid gestures. Their voices were neither loud nor soft, and they spoke clearly with no stumbles.
Viewers were asked to change a damage award (they were role playing a jury case) and as you might expect, the competent approach was more successful for both men and women listeners. Confidently delivered arguments persuaded the jurors to adjust their awards substantially. The dominance approach resulted in no movement at all, even though exactly the same arguments were used. Indeed, the dominance approach stimulated decidedly negative attitudes in nearly all those who viewed the tapes.
Next, Driskel turned his attention to two popular myths about dominance and women. The first myth concerns people's reactions to dominance: since dominance is more common among men,(which past research has established), people are more accepting of men's dominance, but they revial women for the same behavior – a myth certified as true in a Supreme Court decision in the case of Price Waterhouse vs Hopkins (1989). Not so, according to their data. Reactions were quite negative, but equally so for both the man and the woman.
The second myth concerns how males react to dominating females: since males have little experience with dominating females, they react much more negatively to them than women do, and much more negatively than they do to dominating males. Not so, again. Males’ reactions were equally negative for both the man and the woman.
A straightforward test, and results which seem reasonable, yet organizational reality strikes a defiant chord, and women continue to suffer. What’s going on here, and what contribution can this research make to women?
Mixed gender task groups in every organization quickly allocate status and influence among their members. The most popular theory to explain this distribution is the dominance theory. Imagine a herd of elk with several males competing for dominance. The strongest, most aggressive males will dominate. The females seemed badly equipped to compete at all.
Keeping this image in mind, imagine women in mixed gender task groups. If they observe instances of dominance behavior by some of the males, and if they explain the resulting distribution of status and influence in the group according to the dominance theory of the elk, then they would reasonably conclude that emulating these behaviors is the correct avenue to follow to enhance their own status and influence.
Big mistake! A long series of research findings reveal severe penalties for women who make this choice, and Driscoll and his colleagues' findings explain why this happens.
There is a competing theory of how status and influence are distributed in mixed gender task groups which is not as well known as is the dominance theory. This new theory identifies success as being the most important factor to both men and women in such groups – success in completing the task at hand. Status and influence are distributed to members who have the greatest contribution to make.
So who in the group has the greatest contribution to make?
It is those displaying the most competence in their appearance, in their manner of speaking, their presentation of ideas, their posture, their choice of seats (head of the table rather than a corner on the side), and even in the props they bring . . . holding a pencil, wearing a lab coat, and so on. Driscoll and his colleagues' research strongly supports this second theory, and strongly refutes the dominance theory.
An important measure of performance for managers is the ability to influence others, and Driscoll and his colleagues' research speaks directly to this aspect of your performance. If you wish to enhance this ability and display it in meetings (so your boss can see it), practice speaking as the models did in this research: quickly, with an even, moderate voice. Carry a prop. Sit in a visible location, and look people in the eye. Be sure to avoid dominating behaviors. And don’t assume everyone else is influenced by dominating behaviors when other people use them. They aren’t. They're as irritated by them as you are.
Driscoll and his colleagues believe women will benefit by embracing these findings, but then, men will benefit too.
Reference: Driscoll, James, E., Beckett, Olmstead, and Eduardo Salas (1990) Task cues, dominance cues, and influence in task groups. Journal of applied psychology, 78(1), 51–60.
Organizational Leadership Findings, by James Larsen, Ph.D.
Women, Dominance, Competence, and Influence
Research compares two explanations for influence in mixed gender task groups.
Consult Subject Index for related research.