Impact of gender perceptions on team morale

Do you find this insight confronting? We certainly did at Shape Talent Ltd when we uncovered this in our Three Barriers research. The findings applied across a range of industries and levels of seniority. On average, at least 50% of the time women are fearful of saying the wrong thing lest it impact their reputation, their opportunity for promotion, or how she is perceived by her manager or her colleagues. This is not the basis for good decision making or happy cultures. What can you do? 👉 Create psychological safety. People won't speak up if there is a fear of repurcussions. Invite differing perspectives in meetings and ensure there is no penalty levied for sharing a different view. 👉 Ask 'who's views aren't being heard'. If someone hasn't contributed, create space for them by inviting them to share their views. 👉 Equalise 'air time'. Watch to ensure everyone is contributing equally in meetings. Many AI tools will monitor if certain people are dominating the meeting discussion - watch for this and chair meetings in a way that encourages equal air time. 👉 Call out when different perspectives lead to better decisions. Acknowledging the value of different views helps to create an environment where people are more likely to contribute their views. #GenderEquality #EDI #ThreeBarriers

"Can she really be a leader if she’s acting so … girly?" 💄 The question stopped me in my tracks. It came up during a recent 1-1 coaching session with a male executive. It wasn’t meant to offend — it was an honest observation. But it revealed a much deeper issue about how we view leadership and the narrow expectations we place on women in those roles.  The executive shared his struggle to reconcile this team member’s strong leadership aspirations with behaviors he perceived as “girly.” That word — so loaded with societal biases 🌶️ — became the gateway to an important conversation about gender, stereotypes, and leadership.  Through our discussion, a few key insights surfaced:  🧩🌀 Leadership isn’t about fitting a mold: True leadership combines a spectrum of qualities. Assertiveness and decisiveness are just as important as empathy and collaboration. These traits aren’t “masculine” or “feminine” — they’re human. Their value lies in how they’re applied.  ⚡️🧠 Bias influences how we see behavior: The term “girly” often reflects our own unconscious expectations rather than the individual’s ability. Are we unfairly expecting women to embody “masculine” traits? Is "acting like a man" needed to be seen as a credible leader? 👩🏻🎤🧑🏻🎤 Supporting authenticity over conformity: The executive began to recognize the importance of supporting his team member’s authentic leadership style rather than pressuring her to conform to outdated archetypes.  This conversation reinforced a crucial truth: the problem isn’t women’s behavior. It’s the unrealistic expectations we place on them. When we judge leaders by narrow stereotypes, we limit not only their growth but also the potential of our teams. But transformation takes time and reflection. The seed is often planted in trainings, but it’s in the trusted, reflective, and safer space of 1-1 coaching where these biases and assumptions can be safely explored. As this executive began to shift his perceptions and actions, it reminded me: Leaders, especially those in positions of influence, have the power to challenge biases and foster environments where the courage to embrace authenticity breaks through the crust of stereotypes. What assumptions are you holding about what leadership “should” look like? Are they serving you — or holding your team back?  

Damned if you do, damned if you don't! Let me explain. Yesterday, while working on one of my favorite modules, Communication & Presence, as part of a leadership training for middle managers of an FMCG company, something powerful happened. One of the teams -who happened to be all women- brought to light an issue that many women experience at work but often struggle to name. And it's none other than the double bind dilemma. Speak up too much, and you’re seen as aggressive. Hold back, and you’re overlooked. It’s a lose-lose situation. In other words, we hold women to different standards than men and they are penalized no matter how they choose to communicate. This isn't just based on personal experiences, it's widely researched. • Women who are assertive are 30% more likely to be labeled as "abrasive" in performance reviews compared to men • In group discussions, men interrupt women 33% more often than they interrupt other men If you think it's not the case, think again. This is actually how unconscious biases work. They are...unconscious! ⮑ If you're a woman, reflect on how many times you had to rephrase or reconsider your tone or even your expectations from your team, for fear of being judged as "too bossy". ⮑ If you're a man, reflect on how many times you've heard a woman assert herself in the workplace and thought, "she's too tough" or "she complains too much", when the same behavior from a male colleague wouldn’t have raised an eyebrow. This isn’t just about confidence, but about deeply ingrained biases that penalize women for the same behaviors that are rewarded in men. And it has real consequences: fewer women in leadership, fewer diverse perspectives in decision-making, and an ongoing cycle that keeps workplaces inequitable. So, what can we do? ⮑ If you’re a leader, watch for biases in performance feedback and promotions. Are women in your team held to different standards than men? ⮑ If you’re in a meeting, actively invite women’s perspectives and call out interruptions when they happen. ⮑ If you’re a woman, know that it’s not about you, it’s about systems. Build a support network, advocate for yourself, and push for change. Given that International Women’s Day is just around the corner, let’s move beyond celebration and into action. It’s time to change the conversation and the structures that hold women back. What are your thoughts? Have you experienced or witnessed the double bind in action? Let’s talk in the comments. 👇 #IWD #Leadership #Communication #GenderEquality

One of the most powerful lessons I’ve learnt in my decades of work in diversity and inclusion is this: every workplace has in-groups and out-groups. When you’re part of the dominant in-group, you’re more likely to have access to information, opportunities, and subtle encouragement that help you thrive. When you’re not, you often miss out on these invisible boosts. As Professor Binna Kandola, an organisational psychologist who has written extensively on this topic, explains: “There is nothing overtly offensive or discriminatory in the leader’s behaviour towards the in-group and the out-group. Instead, it’s the subtle behaviours, the nuances, the small gestures of encouragement for some and the absence of them for others that are more common and most telling.” And a rule of thumb to remember: “If anybody ever says there are no in-groups and out-groups where they work, they are in the in-group.” In male-dominated organisations, we see these subtle behaviours play out all the time. They show up in everyday banter, sports talk that excludes, being talked over in meetings, or not even being acknowledged when you enter a room. The result? Many women feel less confident to share ideas or raise concerns – exactly the opposite of a psychologically safe culture. And we know psychological safety is vital for team performance. But here’s the thing: these dynamics are often invisible to people inside the dominant group. So if you lead a team, here are four questions to consider: 1.    Am I genuinely encouraging everyone’s ideas, questions and concerns? 2.    Could I be unintentionally giving more subtle encouragement to some but not others? 3.    How can I actively validate the contributions of people who are under-represented or more likely to experience microaggressions? For example, acknowledge a thoughtful idea from someone who usually speaks less, or call out a team member’s courage in sharing a different view. Small micro-validations build confidence and invite more participation. 4.    Could I conduct stay interviews? These are the opposite of exit interviews. They help you check in early and understand what keeps people engaged and feeling included – or what support they may be missing. What other ideas spring to mind for you?

𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗮 𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗸𝘀 𝘂𝗽, 𝗵𝗲’𝘀 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲. When a woman speaks up, she risks being labeled "bossy." Despite progress, the way we perceive leadership is still deeply shaped by gender. Traits like decisiveness, directness, and confidence- essential qualities for leadership- are 𝗽𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝗺𝗲𝗻 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗼𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻 𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝘄𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻. Women who embody these traits frequently face criticism, are perceived as less likable, and are labeled negatively, simply for demonstrating the same behavior their male counterparts are celebrated for. 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲, 𝗶𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀. It influences promotions, career progression, and women's own confidence in stepping forward to lead. ➡️ Changing this bias starts with leaders becoming aware of it: 🔸 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗴𝘂𝗮𝗴𝗲. Would you describe your male and female team members the same way? 🔸 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗼𝘁𝘆𝗽𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗹𝘆. Call out when you see biased labels being used, and redirect the conversation to objective assessments of skills, results, and performance. 🔸 𝗡𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀. Let’s encourage strength, clarity, and confidence, regardless of who demonstrates it. Ambition shouldn't be admired in men and penalized in women. And leadership qualities shouldn't have gender labels. 💠 Real progress happens when we dismantle biases that keep talented people from thriving.

This may not surprise you: Civil workplace conditions can lead to increased engagement. While incivility often results in team member silence. Yet teams often focus on individuals speaking up rather than designing group norms and behaviors that encourage participation. Why does participation matter? Research shows that teams can achieve better outcomes when they learn from ideas offered by group members with a wide range of experiences and backgrounds. Yet not all team cultures make space for those different ideas. To better understand the role of teams in shaping individuals' experiences, researchers conducted two studies: an online experience and a survey of employees across industries. They looked at people’s reluctance or willingness to speak up, and the conditions of the group (rude vs. respectful). What they discovered is that both men and women withheld contributions more in uncivil groups than civil ones. However, women were more likely to choose silence in the face of incivility. In addition to responding to rudeness, concern for gender backlash had women choose silence more often than men. This does not mean that women will not speak up. The researchers found that in civil groups, women reported speaking up to share their ideas just as much as men. What can teams do? ✅ Focus on team norms that encourage respect. This can include perspective taking. When having a different point of view, instead of criticizing, say, “Yes, and…” instead of “Yes, but….” ✅ Value curiosity. Focus on learning from different perspectives. Notice when you align too quickly on consensus or one person’s view and ask, “What are we missing?” During this time when the words in DEI are under attack, many of us are returning to the “why” we do this work. In many ways, inclusion is about respectful environments that encourage different perspectives to contribute to group outcomes. Reducing incivility not only supports wider contributions from all, but it can disproportionately help those who have faced backlash due to bias. In the end, when individuals contribute, teams win. Research by Kristin Bain, Kathryn Coll, Tamar Kreps, and Elizabeth Tenney and published in Harvard Business Review. #teams #culture #inclusion

I was the only woman in the room so through some unspoken rule — I was supposed to plan the farewell party? A University of California survey of 3,000 employees found that women were 29% more likely than white men to report doing more office “housework” than their colleagues. Planning team lunches, and parties, taking notes, cleaning up the table after a meeting, scheduling calls — and other such “thankless” tasks often fall into women’s laps. Each of these is significantly hurting gender equality. Harvard Business Review labels these tasks as 'low-promotability tasks' — that are helpful to the organization but the person performing them isn’t perceived as making an impact. The way work is allocated in organizations needs to change. Not only do we need to re-address the perceived value attached to these tasks, but we also need to ensure that women aren’t the only ones doing office housework. Whenever it happened to me, I didn't have the courage to push back. I still wish I had. It's an unappreciated burden that a lot of women carry but we’re afraid of pushing back because we want to be seen as team players. It's time leaders make sure all work is shared equally, including “Dave’s” goodbye lunch. The trend of non-strategic work being piled up on women's desks needs to stop. We don't need logistical tasks, give us career-making roles and responsibilities. We'll no longer accept being sidelined. #bias #genderequality #womenintech #womenleaders #career #leadership