Christine de Pizan first wrote and promoted gender equality in the 15th century. Author of The Book of the City of Ladies, Christine argued that male dominance is based on irrational and wrongful thinking (1).
In the 18th century, The Shakers, evangelists, promoted gender equality and brought the first female to the ministry as a counterpart to Joseph Meacham. Together, they restructured their evangelical society and balanced the right of gender throughout (2).
Fast forward to the 20th century, the women’s liberation movement in the 1960s through the 1980s brought about political, cultural, and intellectual impacts (3).
In the past 30 years we have observed great progress in reaching gender equality; education is largely accessible to both sexes on the equal basis, gender discrimination at work is illegal, and in sports, such as tennis, women compete for the same prize money as men.
Nevertheless, gender inequality remains a relevant issue. It is present in the form of the income gap, it is present in favoritism towards promoting men over women to managerial and executive positions, and it is present in scoring a job. In large, our subconscious biases are behind the relevance of gender inequality. Nevertheless, it is our responsibility, as men and women, to be aware of them, as well as of other factors that still upkeep the gender gap today.
Gender inequality is arguably smaller than ever before, and through genuine and mutual effort from both genders this issue can become obsolete.
A good place to start in understanding the gender gap is learning about the subconscious biases that are behind the decisions we make that promote such inequality.
According to an experiment conducted by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, our subconscious biases are the driving force behind gender inequality in the entrepreneurial context. Specifically, 68% of investors considered funding for the ideas pitched by male entrepreneurs, and only 32% were considered for funding when a woman entrepreneur was the leading voice behind the entrepreneurial initiative. This observation explains why female-owned enterprises decreased from 43% in 1996 to 39.5% in 2016, while male-operated companies increased from 56% to 60.5% in the same time frame.
In another experiment by the same organization, participants were requested to analyze the resumes of applicants for a lab-manager position. Different recruiters received the same resume, which was either on behalf of a male or a female applicant. In cases when participants evaluated the resume belonging to a male, the applicant was considered more competent, favorable for the position, and was offered a higher starting salary.
As much as we try to shrink gender inequality, the biases against women are apparent: men are regarded as more capable in general. However, there is no research proving male’s superior skills.
Gender inequality does not mean women and men must share all job positions; some require special physical abilities, such as in the case of firefighters, who are expected to be able to lift heavy weight and carry it over considerable distance. While doable for men, not as many females are physically capable of doing that, justifying why there is a prevailing male dominance in physically-demanding industries.
However, both women and men must have equal accessibility and the legal right to all opportunities, such as education, career choice, and growth opportunities. Unfortunately, this is not the case due to the subconscious biases that drive unjust decision-making. Being aware of these biases is already half of the solution, with the second half being the observable progress reached in the recent years (4).
In the last 30 years the income gap has shrunk but still remains noticeable; for $60,000 that men earned in the 1990s, women earned $43,000. In 2017, this number has increased to around $46,000, which accounts for just 5% change. Today, women still earn 80% of what men do, on average, which is unfortunate given the capabilities and motivations we have to effect change (5).
Research indicates that women are just as valuable in the workplace as men; according to The Catalyst, companies where women hold the majority of the board outperform companies that have the fewest female board members by 42% on return on sales and 66% higher return on invested capital. (Reference #6) The reason for such positive impact is because men and women take different approaches towards problem-solving and generating new ideas. By combining diverse knowledge with a wide variety of experiences companies can achieve exponentially higher growth and impact.
The differences between how men and women run a company as board members is similar to the differences in how males and females invest in new ventures.
According to Maxine Koven, women investors tend to focus more on the details, while male investors pay more attention to the scale of the opportunity. In her experience, females are more interested in the plan of how to achieve a goal and its specificities, rather than judging an opportunity based on how big it can become.
Jill Royster, strategic advisor and investor at JCR Consulting, says potential for a partnership guides her decision-making more than simply the potential for growth or the sales numbers. As a woman, she finds it easiest for her to work with those she can establish a relationship with, presumably because this is the hardest to develop if the partnership lacks in mutual interest, or genuine understanding. Hence, she argues that partnerships are not a matter of a discussion and develop only once investment is agreed upon; it’s the “first impression” and a crucial sign for working with other people.
To add to the differences between the male and female approach towards business even more, women, according to investor Jennifer Sills, are more balanced in discussions of their ventures and are more considerate. As she notes, her male counterparts, when pitched to, get worried when investment-seeking presenters dive into the potential internal and external complications that can arise and hurt their businesses. In Mrs. Sill’s experience, while men regard that as lack of confidence in a presenter, women investors appreciate such balanced evaluation of a business when being pitched to (7).
The above examples are just few of many where differences between male and female views are exposed. Despite the differences in approach, both are capable of achieving great results in business, politics, and other industries.
I have worked with culturally diverse teams of different sizes and personalities for over eight years and have personally observed a consistent trend; in male-majority teams, the atmosphere is more competitive, while in female-majority teams the culture is more collaborative.
Men attempt to establish the leadership figure within their teams because they feel they have to. Women, rather than competing, tend to build on top of one another’s idea, not worrying about who leads the conversation. Teams with female majority welcome a greater inclusiveness of opinions and considerations, and are more detail-oriented in mapping a plan to achieve a team goal. Unsurprisingly, working with female-majority teams yields just as great of results, often with multiple alternatives for change.
Today, women occupy more than half of accounting & auditing jobs, but only 5% are female CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. (Reference #8) Women-predominant companies outperform other companies by 42% in return on sales, however the female workforce earns 80% of what men earn. (Reference #8) Today, we have more capabilities and motivation than ever before to close the gender gap in the professional arena. Even though considerable progress has been made in shrinking that gap, the world will have to wait until the year 2059 for women to earn as much as men, which is not only unacceptable, but also shameful to even consider (9).
To adapt the right mindset towards solving the gender gap issue, we must become aware of the biases men have towards women at work. We cannot allow ourselves to judge one’s past and potential experience based on gender; there are many women who outperform men in their jobs. Companies that underpay women for doing the same job as men must not take pride and credit for their integrity, performance, or superficial inclusiveness. At a time when women found companies and provide countless opportunities for work and growth, it’s counterintuitive and wrong to weaken female influence on today’s prosperous business environment. Still, female entrepreneurs are twice as likely to receive investments when at least one woman is a part of a decision-making team. Reaching gender equality at work is estimated to bring an additional $500 million to the US economy. (Reference #10) More importantly, respecting and crediting effort over one's sex can also result in better company reputation, increased access to high-quality applicants, and happier and industry-setting organizational performance.
The world has never been as developed as it is today. With a population of over 7 billion people, such large amounts of diverse opinions, expertise, and ways of executing help us collaborate with one another and consider the best advice to create the most convenient and life-simplifying products and services. We have learned to embrace globalization, we have learned to embrace collaboration among one another to deliver to the best of our abilities, and we have learned that having both men and women work together yields the best possible results. What we are still to learn is to embrace gender equality; the world would not develop as much as it has in he last 50-100 years if it wasn’t for women filling in the gaps in male’s approach to business, politics, and life in general. Today’s pace to advancement and creation has been unimaginable just a century ago, and with equal treatment and recognition of effort and performance from both men and women we can continue to progress at the pace never experienced before.
References
- Riane Eisler (2007). The Real Wealth of Nations: Creating a Caring Economics. p. 72.
- Evans, Frederick William (1859). Shakers: Compendium of the Origin, History, Principles, Rules and Regulations, Government, and Doctrines of the United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing. New York: D. Appleton & Co. p. 34.
- Second-wave feminism. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/postwarera/1960s-america/a/second-wave-feminism
- Gault, B., Hartmann, H., Hegewisch, A., & Milli, J. (2018). Pay Equity & Discrimination | Institute for Women's Policy Research. Retrieved from https://iwpr.org/issue/employment-education-economic-change/pay-equity-discrimination/
- Companies With More Women Board Directors Experience Higher Financial Performance, According to Latest Catalyst Bottom Line Report. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.catalyst.org/media/companies-more-women-board-directors-experience-higher-financial-performance-according-latest
- Chandramouli, D. (2018). 7 Women Investors Reveal What's Different When a Woman Evaluates Your Pitch. Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/319476
- Women on Corporate Boards Globally. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-corporate-boards-globally
- Sheth, S., Gal, S., & Gould, S. (2018). 6 charts show how much more men make than women. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/gender-wage-pay-gap-charts-2017-3
- Pay Equity & Discrimination | Institute for Women's Policy Research. (2018). Retrieved from https://iwpr.org/issue/employment-education-economic-change/pay-equity-discrimination