Wise interventions in organizations

Adding Fuel to the Collective Fire: Stereotype Threat, Solidarity, and Support for Change

We hypothesize a yet-unstudied effect of experiencing systemic stereotype threat on women's collective action efforts: igniting women's support for other women and motivation to improve organizational gender balance. Hypotheses are supported in two surveys (Study 1: N = 1,365 business school alumnae; Study 2: N = 386 women Master of Business Administration [MBA]), and four experiments (Studies 3-6; total N = 1,897 working women). Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate that experiencing stereotype threat is negatively associated with women's domain-relevant engagement (supporting extant work on the negative effects of stereotype threat), but positively associated with women's support and advocacy of gender balance. Studies 3 to 6 provide causal evidence that stereotype threat activation leads to greater attitudes and intentions to support gender balance, ruling out negative affect as an alternative explanation and identifying ingroup solidarity as a mechanism. We discuss implications for working women, women leaders, and organizations striving to empower their entire workforce through developing equitable and inclusive practices.

Feeling Heard: Experiences of Listening (or Not) at Work

Listening has been identified as a key workplace skill, important for ensuring high-quality communication, building relationships, and motivating employees. However, recent research has increasingly suggested that speaker perceptions of good listening do not necessarily align with researcher or listener conceptions of good listening. While many of the benefits of workplace listening rely on employees feeling heard, little is known about what constitutes this subjective perception. To better understand what leaves employees feeling heard or unheard, we conducted 41 interviews with bank employees, who collectively provided 81 stories about listening interactions they had experienced at work. Whereas, prior research has typically characterized listening as something that is perceived through responsive behaviors within conversation, our findings suggest conversational behaviors alone are often insufficient to distinguish between stories of feeling heard vs. feeling unheard. Instead, our interviewees felt heard or unheard only when listeners met their subjective needs and expectations. Sometimes their needs and expectations could be fulfilled through conversation alone, and other times action was required. Notably, what would be categorized objectively as good listening during an initial conversation could be later counteracted by a failure to follow-through in ways expected by the speaker. In concert, these findings contribute to both theory and practice by clarifying how listening behaviors take on meaning from the speakers' perspective and the circumstances under which action is integral to feeling heard. Moreover, they point toward the various ways listeners can engage to help speakers feel heard in critical conversations.