HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » It’s a scenario that coul...

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:32 PM

It’s a scenario that could be straight out of a textbook on gender bias:

http://m.fastcompany.com/3034895/strong-female-lead/the-one-word-men-never-see-in-their-performance-reviews

THE ONE WORD MEN NEVER SEE IN THEIR PERFORMANCE REVIEWS

BY KATHLEEN DAVIS

“Jessica is really talented, but I wish she’d be less abrasive. She comes on too strong.” Her male counterpart? “Steve is an easy case, smart and great to work with. He needs to learn to be a little more patient, but who doesn’t?”

These statements, uttered by an engineering manager who was preparing performance reviews, were the catalyst for linguist Kieran Snyder to see if she could quantify the double standards in the way male and female employees are evaluated.

In a report for Fortune.com, she collected 248 performance reviews from 28 companies from large technology corporations to small startups. The reviews came from 180 male and female managers.

via. Fortune.com
Perhaps unsurprisingly critical feedback was doled out in a much higher ratio to women: 58.9% of men’s reviews contained critical feedback, while an overwhelming 87.9% of the reviews received by women did.

Not only did women receive more criticism in their performance reviews, it was less constructive and more personal. For example, the critical feedback men received was mostly geared toward suggestions to develop additional skills:

..more..





23 replies, 2025 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply It’s a scenario that could be straight out of a textbook on gender bias: (Original post)
G_j Aug 2014 OP
leftstreet Aug 2014 #1
seabeyond Aug 2014 #6
calimary Aug 2014 #11
seabeyond Aug 2014 #12
Arugula Latte Aug 2014 #2
G_j Aug 2014 #7
Nye Bevan Aug 2014 #3
OnlinePoker Aug 2014 #13
dsc Aug 2014 #18
OnlinePoker Aug 2014 #21
dsc Aug 2014 #22
dsc Aug 2014 #23
WCLinolVir Aug 2014 #4
seabeyond Aug 2014 #5
IdaBriggs Aug 2014 #8
SheilaT Aug 2014 #9
KitSileya Aug 2014 #14
BlancheSplanchnik Aug 2014 #10
Donald Ian Rankin Aug 2014 #15
Tuesday Afternoon Aug 2014 #16
Donald Ian Rankin Aug 2014 #19
Tuesday Afternoon Aug 2014 #20
Android3.14 Aug 2014 #17

Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:42 PM

1. Holy crap

Abrasive alone was used 17 times to describe 13 different women, but the word never appeared in men’s reviews.


!!

Interesting article, thanks for posting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #1)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:53 PM

6. i am told often, and regulary i am abrasive for simply speaking. kinda like that sentence

 

would be construed as abrasive. it leaves me pondering, often. what is being demanded.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #6)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:02 PM

11. I hear all the time, from men - "meh, this is BIZNISS!!! Look, it's just BIZNISS!"

But man oh man, let ME say that to one of them in the middle of various negotiations, and Dear God does that make the very sky above our heads rip from horizon to horizon and fall in, bringing on the destruction of Western Civilization! OMG! OH the HUMANITY!!! "HOW DARE YOU!" "Now WAIT JUST A MINUTE!" "HEY! THAT'S not the way BIZNISS is done!" OMG their heads spin around on their necks and they have apoplectic fits!

Such a double standard out there against women executives. It'd be funny if it weren't true.

And it's even WORSE if you're a mom. You're the lowest of the low, the least deserving of equal treatment or respect. You're just something else to sneer at. They practically spit out the word "momager" - which I REFUSE to be called, btw. But it's absolutely a term of derision and diminishment. You're that much less likely to be taken seriously in a lot of cases.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #11)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:04 PM

12. it is still funny, even true. we have lived it a lifetime and know what we are talking about.

 

no few people either. consistently spoken by women and men alike. academia, studies and everything else. BUT... we are supose to pretend it really is not our reality to coddle the egos. that is the bottomline.

and edit... good seeing you. off to a nap, for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:44 PM

2. Sadly not surprising.

 

There is an effort going on to nip this in the bud at an early age:

http://banbossy.com/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arugula Latte (Reply #2)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:54 PM

7. important lessons

"When a little boy asserts himself, he's called a “leader.” Yet when a little girl does the same, she risks being branded “bossy.” Words like bossy send a message: don't raise your hand or speak up. By middle school, girls are less interested in leading than boys—a trend that continues into adulthood. Together we can encourage girls to lead."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:46 PM

3. Expect words such as "abrasive", "shrill" and "hysterical" to be applied to Hillary Clinton

if she decides to run for president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #3)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:12 PM

13. As were done with Sarah Palin in this forum in the past (hysterical was used as funny, not batshit).

It's not nice when it's your candidate who's the target but fine if it's the other side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnlinePoker (Reply #13)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 06:08 PM

18. actually I challenge you to find either abrassive or shrill used in relationship to Palin

I frankly don't think it happened all that often. She was called stupid, moronic etc but I don't recall shrill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #18)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 06:23 PM

21. Challenge accepted

Abrasive
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3925920
Go to reply 7

Shrill
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3859519
Go to reply 8

All you have to do is type in Palin shrill or Palin abrasive in the DU search and you'll see it. Nobody calls the people out on it.

You can go to this one for both:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6918357
Reply 12

On edit:
Even Clinton hasn't escaped this treatment on DU

Shrill
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2169460

Abrasive
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5535706

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnlinePoker (Reply #21)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 06:49 PM

22. I know full well Clinton hasn't

but frankly I think for every one you can find for Palin you will find about 3 for Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnlinePoker (Reply #21)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 06:51 PM

23. looking at your Palin ones

One was a direct quote of someone else (not a DUer). The second was indeed on point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:52 PM

4. No surprise there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 02:52 PM

5. gotta bookmark. sounds fascinating. and most women recognize. i gotta read the whole

 

when i get a minute. do NOT let me forget. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #5)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 04:11 PM

8. I had to send the link to my husband with the note I had NOT

 

been asked to contribute to the article.

I am a woman in the tech field. I thought they were quoting from my life, especially the last year!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 04:21 PM

9. At least thirty years ago I read something

 

studying conversational patterns of men and women in groups. Invariably in a mixed group the men dominated the conversations, yet women were said to be talking to much. The inclination to stifle women is long standing.

In addition, male behavior is seen as the correct default in almost all situations, and yet when a woman adopts that behavior she is called abrasive or worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #9)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:13 PM

14. When women talk 17% of the time, it is considered equality

When women talk 33% of the time, women dominate the conversation. That's the numbers. They are the same as with crowds - 17% women and 83% men are considered an equal gendered crowd. If there are 33% women, the perception is that women dominate the crowd.

The Geena Davis Institute does research on this in media.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 04:42 PM

10. oh so true. so many women's livelihoods, earnings, financial health....

.......



It's so insidious, seemingly small potatoes.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:17 PM

15. I prefer identical-resume tests, because everything else is controlled for.

This provides strong circumstantial evidence of double standards, but doesn't eliminate the possibility that being "abrasive" correlates with being female.

If you take two identical resumes with different names on, and get different numbers of expressions of interest, on the other hand, that's pretty irrefutable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #15)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:25 PM

16. So then, are you refuting the findings given in this OP?

Is that what you are doing here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #16)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 06:10 PM

19. Please read posts before replying to them.

It saves asking for information that's already been provided.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #19)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 06:17 PM

20. Muddy Waters. I have seen him live. Have you? It was an excellent concert at a very small venue.

Only 175 people were there that night. A good time was had by all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Original post)

Sat Aug 30, 2014, 05:40 PM

17. It is unfortunate there was no difference based on the gender of the evaluator

 

I wonder what factors, sociologically, are prompting the interviewers to be harsher on women. Do cognates of this type of behavior appear in other simian populations?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread