A couple of weeks ago, my newsletter addressed the topic that Women aren’t the Problem. The System is. For decades we have been carrying the burden of adapting to systems that weren’t designed for us and, in fact, work against us due to the bias ingrained in their foundation.
Let’s face it. Organizations are not neutral playing fields and never have been. We know that. But our survival has depended on learning how to navigate the challenges to not only survive but hopefully, thrive.
And because of that, we’ve been taught how deal with the status quo in order to succeed. But when is ‘enough is enough’?. Change is long overdue.
Organizations need to take responsibility for the environments in which that success or failure for women takes place.
Here’s what organization can do:
Make advancement less subjective
In the existing work environment, advancement still depends on subjective judgements. Therefore, it’s an easy way for politics, bias, and personality to take the lead in decision making.
Terms like executive presence, strategic thinking, culture fit, and not quite ready can hide a great deal of subjectivity.
I have certainly experienced this in my career. One manager liked me. Did her best to mentor me and offer me opportunities to grow. She took the time to get to know me, my weaknesses, my strengths, and helped me flourish.
Once I was promoted and changed departments, the expectations with a new manager were different. He had little time for me except to give directions. He was not interested in my professional development and was simply interested in results.
Because their management styles were different, how they evaluated me was also different. One manager emphasized executive presence and strategic thinking, helped me become a stronger leader. The other was a task master with an eye for performance.
In other words, what I experienced was the subjectivity and differences in judgment.
Organizations, however, can set guidelines by asking:
How much of advancement is based on measurable performance and how much depends on subjective judgments?
Organizations need to give managers clearer expectations around how advancement decisions are made. Instead of asking managers to define what advancement requires, establish criteria before promotion decisions are made, and require evidence for subjective assessments.
The goal isn’t to remove human judgment. It’s to make the systems surrounding that judgment more transparent and accountable, harder to manipulate and easier to examine.
Deloitte, for example, is experimenting with setting established gender-equity standards across recruitment, promotion, succession, development, mentoring, sponsorship, and flexible working. They are tracking gender data by business unit and job level through a diversity dashboard and review those metrics regularly with senior leadership.
That’s an important distinction: Deloitte isn’t simply asking managers to be less biased. (Almost an impossible task anyway). It’s building systems that make outcomes visible.
Read the full article on Substack.com.
Recent Comments