The Double-Edged Sword of Gender Dynamics in Professional Collaborations

Social Role Theory in Action: Understanding Gender Dynamics in Corporate R&D

The People Geek

Sep 04, 2024

Article voiceover

1×

0:00

-8:04

Imagine wielding a sword that cuts both ways – every swing meant to advance your position potentially inflicting harm on yourself. This is the precarious reality many women face in professional settings, particularly when it comes to forming high-status collaborations. A recent study in the pharmaceutical industry has shed light on this phenomenon, revealing how gender influences the formation of valuable professional connections and the structural mechanisms that either amplify or reduce workplace inequality (Rua-Gomez et al., 2023).

Let's dive into this research and explore its implications for HR practitioners and leaders who are committed to fostering equitable workplaces.

The Study: Unraveling Gender Disparities in R&D Collaborations

Researchers examined data from 42 large pharmaceutical companies' R&D laboratories spanning 1985 to 2010. Their goal? To understand how gender affects an employee's chances of forming high-status connections within geographically dispersed, knowledge-based organisations (Rua-Gomez et al., 2023).

Key Findings:

1. The Co-location Conundrum: Males who are geographically co-located with a "high status" colleague are 40% more likely to form a tie with that colleague than their female peers in similar situations.

2. The Network Advantage: Women benefit 30% more than men from network proximity, as indicated by the presence of common third-party ties.

3. Gender Neutrality in High Status: Interestingly, the gender of the high-status colleague didn't affect the likelihood of co-located, direct ties for women.

4. Strength in Similarity: Although, the positive effect of third-party ties for women is stronger if the star colleague is also a woman.

These findings paint a complex picture of how gender dynamics play out in professional settings. But what's driving these disparities? Enter Social Role Theory.

The Double-Edged Sword: Social Role Theory in Action

Social Role Theory suggests that certain behaviours are typically associated with masculinity or femininity:

• Agentic behaviours (typically masculine): assertiveness, self-promotion, confidence, goal-focused

• Communal behaviours (typically feminine): caring, cooperative, relationship-focused

Here's where the double-edged sword comes into play:

One Edge: The Power of Agentic Behaviour

Engaging in agentic behaviours can potentially help women form high-status ties, particularly in face-to-face interactions. These behaviours allow women to:

• Gain visibility in the organisation

• Demonstrate competence through confidence

• Assert their ideas and contributions

• Actively seek out collaborations with high-status individuals

The Other Edge: The Backlash Effect

When women exhibit these agentic behaviours, they often face what's known as the "backlash effect" because these actions violate gender stereotypes. This can manifest as:

• Perceptions of the woman as unlikeable, arrogant, or socially awkward

• Negative evaluations of interpersonal skills

• Accusations of being "bossy" or "aggressive" for behaviours that might be labelled "proactive" or "leader-like" in men

• Social and professional penalties not faced by men exhibiting the same behaviours

The Double Bind: This creates a challenging situation for women. If they don't act agentically, they may be perceived as less competent or suitable for high-status collaborations. If they do act agentically, they risk social and professional backlash that can harm their relationships and career prospects.

"When they act congruently with prevailing gender stereotypes, they engage less than their male peers in agentic behaviors that would increase their visibility and signal their competence to the star scientist. When they violate such stereotypes and engage in agentic behaviors, they are more likely to come across as arrogant or socially awkward instead of being viewed as competent and self-reassured, as is the case for their male peers."(Rua-Gomez et al., 2023, pg.10)

This double bind helps explain why women benefit less from geographic co-location with high-status colleagues. They're caught between conforming to gender stereotypes (and potentially being overlooked) or violating them and facing backlash.

The Emergence of a Potential Solution

The study's findings on the importance of third-party ties for women can be seen as an emergent solution to this double bind. Third-party ties allow women to signal their competence and value indirectly, bypassing the need for potentially risky agentic self-promotion in face-to-face settings.

Implications for HR Practitioners and Leaders

As HR professionals and leaders, we face a critical question: How do we address these structural inequalities to create more equitable workplaces? Two potential approaches emerge:

1. Amplify the Emergent Response: Increase opportunities for networking, particularly those that facilitate third-party connections. This approach leverages women's current successful strategies but doesn't address the underlying gender stereotypes.

2. Tackle the Underlying Issue: Work to break down gender stereotypes and create an environment where agentic behaviours are equally accepted from all genders. This approach may lead to short-term challenges but addresses the root cause of the disparity.

It's crucial to recognise that bias isn't simply a matter of individual thought processes. Instead, these softly assembled cognitive processes are embodied, embedded, enacted and extended into our environment, specifically in this case our social and organisational structures, creating what researchers call "socio-cultural invitations to act". These invitations shape behaviour for all genders, often unconsciously perpetuating unequal outcomes (Favela, 2024; Hutton & Myin, 2018). The challenge with most “unconscious bias” training is the flawed assumption that cognition is not embodied, embedded, enacted or extended, hence its failure to generate much meaningful change.

Thanks for reading People Geek's Substack! Who might also be interested in this subject?This post is public so feel free to share it with others in your network.

Moving Forward

As we navigate these complex dynamics, it's clear that there's no simple solution. However, critical inquiry is the first step toward change. Here are some actionable steps for HR practitioners and leaders:

1. Evaluate your organisation's collaboration patterns. Where are there gender disparities in high-status ties?

2. Assess your networking events and mentorship programs. How can we amplify the invitations to act for females to make diverse connections and third-party ties?

3. Start with our own position in the system. Reflect on our own actions and how we might be acting on invitations to act, including the backlash effect. How often to you look around when you hear or use the word “bossy”?

4. Review your performance evaluation criteria. Are agentic behaviours valued equally regardless of gender? Are agentic behaviours balanced with communal ones in various leadership styles?

5. Foster a culture that values both agentic and communal behaviours from all employees.

By understanding these dynamics and taking proactive steps, we can work towards creating workplaces where talent and contribution are recognised regardless of gender. This approach may help address the "Productivity Puzzle" in research publishing, where women often face inequitable outcomes despite equal qualifications (Cameron et al., 2016).

What are your thoughts and experiences navigating these gender dynamics in your organisation?

People Geek's Substack