The Role of Gender in the Workplace

According to the National Science Foundation (2009), women at this day and age, are still underrepresented in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math). This is seen not only on STEM industry positions both also in college degree applications. There have been numerous studies as to the benefits of gender diversity in the workplace. The question is whether gender diversity really do increase productivity in the workplace? If so, what are the recommendations to increase gender diversity? Lastly, how effective are these recommendations?

In 2011, Julia Bear and Anita Woolley conducted a review of the existing literature regarding the effects of gender diversity on team processes and performance. Titled “The Role of Gender in Team Collaboration and Performance,” the two researchers concluded that team collaboration is improved by the presence of women in a team. They claimed that having women in teams encourages participation and collaboration between team members. They added that this contributes to the “collective intelligence” of the team. As opposed individual intelligence, collective intelligence is highly dependent on the quality of social interactions in the group.  However, the authors were quick to point out that the presence of women in a team does not necessarily promote better team collaboration. There are has to be a balance between men and women as well as parity of influence among team members. Having a few “token” women will not be sufficient in improving collaboration and might even be detrimental in the initial team dynamics. In addition, there may be cases that increased team collaboration may not happen due to pre-existing stereotypes on women. The authors concluded that, to be able to reap the benefits of gender diversity, there should be enabling factors which would bridge the gender gap in the sciences not only in numbers but also in roles. There should be a recognition for roles that women play in science teams.  

Two years after Bear and Woolley released their article, researchers from the University of Pennsylvania found out that women are indeed geared towards creating solutions that work in a group by comparing neural connections between male and female brains (Ingalhalikar et al., 2013). This discovery coincides with the claims of Bear and Woolley, it confirms that there is biological basis that women have the innate ability to encourage participation and collaboration between team members. The comparison strength of neural connections, however, were qualitative in nature and that a statistical significance between these neural connections needs to be established (Joel & Tarrasch, 2013). Regardless of the limitations of biological evidence, Bear and Woolley were on the right track that, indeed, women do improve collaboration in a team.

However and though laudable in their analysis as shown by more recent studies, Bear and Woolley (2011) got the wrong call to action, or was misguided at best. Promoting gender diversity in the workplace should not be too focused on the tailoring a career path that is fitted especially for women nor recognition of the collaborative impact of women in STEM teams. That would entail stereotyping women to be predisposed to a certain skill or role over another. Wouldn’t that contradict their own claim that “token” women team members does not improve team performance? A recent study concluded that young people are actually progressive when it comes to gender. When the researchers surveyed the video game character preferences of young gamers, only 39 percent of high-school aged boys preferred playing male characters, and 60 percent of high-school aged girls preferred to play as female characters (Hall, 2015). Thus, it is best to keep the roles gender neutral and let students or employees choose their own path instead of creating tailor fitted career paths for women as a response to the underrepresentation, is to imply that the existing roles are not “feminine” enough to attract women. That would be ludicrous.

The imbalance of men and women in STEM seem to happen when women are about to embark to adulthood, when they develop their first impressions to people who work or study in STEM fields. Take for example the latest controversy of one of Rosetta’s scientist, Matt Taylor, who wore a bowling shirt covered in scantily clad caricatures of sexy women in provocative poses while being interviewed in TV. Taylor has been criticized for his shirt which was deemed sexist and insensitive (France, 2014).  S.E. Smith (2014) wrote in an article on XOJane, “…he (Matt Taylor) had no idea that he was engaging in exactly the kind of casual sexism that drives women away from STEM.” Chris Plante and Arielle Duhaime-Ross (2014) summarized it perfectly in their article on TheVerge, “This is the sort of casual misogyny that stops women from entering certain scientific fields. They see a guy like that on TV and they don't feel welcome... This shirt is representative of all of that, and the ESA has yet to issue a statement or apologize for that.” Indeed, to get women excited about getting into STEM fields, high-profile scientists like Matt Taylor need to be more conscientious about sexism in his the field and be a good role model who is welcoming of diversity.

Speaking of role models, celebrating successful women within STEM is also important. One role model is Emilie Marcus. She recounted her experience in STEM in her article, “Perspectives: Science, Gender, and the Balanced Life (2013).” It was inspiring, straightforward and a must-read for women who aspire to go into the sciences. Her observation is that there are few women in STEM because men are more comfortable trading family life over their own career. She added that the field is so demanding that requires a lot to time and devotion. Women are often faced with a trade-off between family life and career, and that hard decisions need to be made. That being said, Marcus recommended that science could improve by favoring diversity, teamwork and healthy work/life balance.

The recommendation of Marcus made a lot of sense. Scientist and researchers do experience a lot of pressure in the workplace and it would take a devoted individual to be successful in the field. In fact, The Association for Women in Science (AWIS) conducted a worldwide survey on scientists and researchers showing that, indeed, the most common issues of professionals in science and technology fields are the lack of flexibility in the workplace, unimpressive career development opportunities, and low salaries of low salaries of professionals. In addition, the survey showed that women were more likely than men to report that work-life balance difficulties negatively impacted their careers and 40 percent of which delayed childbearing so as not affect their work.

The observation of Marcus was right on the mark but what she failed to admit or say is that societal pressures for women may play a role in it. Yes, a highly competitive and demanding science career takes away a woman’s time to build and take care of her family. But, is it societal pressures that make her obliged to do so? This is what both the Marcus, and Bear and Woolley failed to ask themselves. Gender roles when it comes to child-rearing is not discussed nor analyzed. It would be interesting to note that in a Families and Work Institute (FWI) study of young workers, claimed that there is no difference between young women with and without children in their desire to move to jobs with more responsibilities (Galinsky, Aumann & Bond, 2011). The contradicting findings of AWS and FWI does not actually cancel each other. In fact, it shows the importance of perceived gender roles and how it can skew data if it is not considered as a factor. Thus, it would be important to ask and study as to how perception of gender roles in child-rearing play when it comes to initiating a career or advancing in STEM – an important issue neither Marcus nor Bear and Woolley considered.

In summary, gender diversity really do improve team productivity when there is parity in influence. Recognition and creation of certain roles tailor fitted for women may be counterproductive. Instead, the better approach is to tackle the issues of sexism head-on to promote better role models in STEM who are sensitive to the need for gender diversity. It is also important to celebrate female role models. Lastly and more importantly, the sexism and perceived gender roles should be studied and addressed in the societal level. By not doing so, initiatives will reap the benefits of gender diversity would prove difficult to execute.

Bibliography

Association for Women in Science (n.d.) The Work Life Integration Overload: Thousands of Scientist Weigh in on Outmoded Work Environments, Unfriendly Family Policies. Available:http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.awis.org/resource/resmgr/imported/AWIS_Work_Life_Balance_Executive_Summary.pdf. Last accessed 9^th of Mar 2015.

Bear, J. & Woolley, A. (2011) The Role of Gender in Team Collaboration and Performance.  Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 36 (2), p.146–153.

France, L. (2014) Philae researcher criticized for shirt covered in scantily clad women. CNN 14^th of Nov, Available:http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/living/matt-taylor-shirt-philae-rosetta-project/. Last accessed 9^th of Mar 2015.

Galinsky, E., Aumann, K. & Bond, J. (2011) Times are Changing: Gender Generation at Work and at Home. Available:http://familiesandwork.org/site/research/reports/Times_Are_Changing.pdf. Last accessed 9^th of March 2015.

Hall, C. (2015) The games industry is wrong about kids, gaming and gender (update). Polygon 5^th of Mar, Available: http://www.polygon.com/2015/3/5/8153213/the-games-industry-is-wrong-about-kids-gaming-and-gender. Last accessed 9th of Mar 2015.

Ingalhalikar, M. et. al. (2013) Sex differences in the structural connectome of the human brain. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences USA, 111(2), p.823–828. Available: http://www.pnas.org/content/111/2/823.full. Last accessed 9^th of Mar 2015.

Joel, D. & Tarrasch R. (2013) On the mis-presentation and misinterpretation of gender-related data: The case of Ingalhalikar’s human connectome study. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences USA, 111(6), p.E637

Marcus, E. (2013) Perspectives: Science, Gender, and the Balanced Life. Issues in Science and Technology 27^th of Dec, Available: http://issues.org/29-3/perspectives-2/. Last accessed 9^th of Mar 2015.

National Science Foundation. (2009) Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Available: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd. Last accessed 9^th of Mar 2015.

Plante, C. & Ross, A. (2014) I don't care if you landed a spacecraft on a comet, your shirt is sexist and ostracizing. TheVerge 13^th of Nov, Available:http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/13/7213819/your-bowling-shirt-is-holding-back-progress. Last accessed 9th of Mar 2015.

Smith, S. (2014) A Philae Researcher Wore An Unbelievably Sexist Shirt On A Livefeed and Women in STEM Are Pissed. XOJane 13^th of Nov, Available:http://www.xojane.com/issues/sexist-shirt-philae-matt-taylor. Last accessed 9^th of Mar 2015.