Non-obvious gender discrimination in project work. How laissez-faire approach might disadvantage you
Well, we all are aware more than we'd like to of salary gap, prejudices around maternity leaves (one can get an impression that just one gender has children), so that it seems that nothing can be added to the matter.
So let's highlight now more subtle ways of gender discrimination in project work. I will combine the narrative with some storytelling of my recent experience, where I practiced the laissez-faire approach to the issue and how it consistently disadvantaged me.
I hope that might help you to build you awareness as a woman in a mens' team, or refine your intuition as an IT recruiter.
Let's consider the case with responsibility shared, roles not clearly defined and high interdependency among teammates, as it's often the case in a project work. For example - a team lead distracts himself from organisational/communicational work and it's being taken by someone who feels a personal responsibility for the result, for example a PM.
A framework I would describe as 'too much dependance on someone else's shit', you name it. Startups, academical group projects, any projects with a distracted teamlead would be a perfect examples...
And let's consider you are a woman among male colleagues in this set up, which is often the case in an IT project.
This year I was assigned to write my diploma in GSOM Data Analytics with a really opportunistic guy, let's name him Jake, (hi Jake McMahon, all the 6 resemblances are occasional). The irony is that the gay is qhostwriting articles now where intensively shares good opinions on true leadership, trust in teamwork, feminism and transparency. I find it just outrageous regarding the experience I have had with him in reality. This experience let me know everything of gender discrimination, subtle and not much.
There are some directions.
1. Not inviting to project related meeting/calls
This was explained by short-term reasonability (overloaded servers etc.) or not explained at all, but it disadvantaged me in the long run. For example, I missed the insights and experiences I could and was supposed to gain out of this collaboration.
2. Deciding the things that touch you in your absence
This way some of my contributions weren't indicated on the table, prepared without my participation (and of course it was supposed to be prepared collaboratively). Also the whole structure of the table was decided in a very intresting way: very detailed representation of his contributions and aggregate one of mine -> more frequent appearance of his name than of mine. Additionally, my chapters weren't even specifically named. I would remind - the committee opinion on defense is completely based on the visual representation.
As the smart guy wrote in his numerous smart posts, 'the way you represent the data depends on the strategy you pursue'.
Why I allowed such a representation? Did I at all? Will be explained in the next points, gonna be even more surprising.
This specific case was explained to me the way that "such structure was more convenient for those who elaborated the table, and they weren't much familiar with my part".
But this was exactly the problem and the reason why I should be represented from the beginning!
Well, this couloir manner of taking decisions/discussing project-related stuff is a very common practice among men, while they care little to invite women to participate.
When you face it, it's tempting to take it in adaptive way, since you aren't really able to affect it (you cannot prohibit anyone to discuss anything in your absence), and find some short-term advantages there.
Meanwhile, the conclusion I got out of this experience was that laissez-faire on that matter will bring you profound disadvantages in long run.
So, what could be a solution.
Which I DO NOT recommend, is the highly cited advice in popular psychology. "You should discuss the issue personally".
But if a person doesn't respect your enough to take your interests into account, why would he do to take seriously your dissatisfaction?
For example, in my case when I brought the issue to the surface, Jake just kept repeating "Can we please discuss something productive". So basically made me feel inadequate like solving a communicational issue would be counterproductive.
What really was is what happened next because the issue wasn't solved.
Since the couloir decision-making is often based on the careless convenience, it has to get inconvenient. For example, by consistently not accepting the decisions, made in your absence if you should have taken part. Exception: if you were invited but declined the meeting.
3. Tasks which bring you no advantage
Men tend to take the tasks which would help them gain prestige. While not quantifiable, 'reproductive' rather than productive work (which don't promote anyone but still has to be done) - let better someone else do it.
As women are often perceived by men as 'housekeepers', or even worse 'babysitters', male colleagues might encourage you to put your time on the task you never get acknowledgement for - so they don't have to.
The other reason is the feeling of personal responsibility for the result, which women tend to have while their male collegues for some reason don't.
In my case, Jake didn't mind to faiI diploma twice (and also bring the whole team to the failure). It was his third attempt. And I absolutely did.
What a responsible team member get to do in such situation is adopting babysitting job. For example, endless reminders to other what and when they have to deliver.
It consumes a lot of energy - keeping work in mind is also work. And the truth is - you are never gonna be paid or otherwise acknowledged for someone else's tasks, no matter how much effort you put on getting them to do it.
Another aspect of the same problem is discouraging women to try themselves on more ambitious tasks by not taking it seriously, poor collaboration etc.
4. Lack of soft skills (communication, timing, empathy)
Sometimes I saw even male colleagues, who were proud of that lack. Not in the same situation, that particular person would think he's perfect.
Every skill one lacks, particularly communicational ones, will put an extra burden on the rest of the team.
By the way, you will hardly get a relevant impression of someone' soft skills on an interview or any form of self-presentation. There is approximately zero correlation between what a person brings to a self-presentation and what he will bring in reality. May be there is even negative one - a self-conception as a soft skills genius might indicate egocentrism.
5. Creating precarious conditions for no reason
Such conditions might be ok for some psychotypes (mostly men's, since they tend to be more risk tolerant), but harmful for some others (mostly women, who are inclined to stability).
Two hours before deadline for final submit of our thesis I got panic attack. Till the last day I was sure everything is gonna be okay - we had more than a month for any kind of improvements, I suggested to do these or that, and since my suggestions were ignored, I assumed that the team considers job done. At the very last day Jake ...decides to rewrite his chapter in the last few hours before deadline.
It's 9 pm. We have to complete some formalities, inclusive exchange of our signs to put it on everyone's copy. And also bring the text to the format after downloading from the cloud, fill in the key words and abstract while submitting and other. I request Jake to send me his sign. He doesn't bother to respond - he's busy with total rewriting. The file looks like after Chernobyl explosion. Yes, I did back up. No, I cannot upload the back up - our copies must be the same. And still, the sign.
Everything floats in front of my eyes. For 15 minutes I lose the sence of reality. The second case in my life - the first one was when I lost my bus somewhere in the middle of East Europe without money. The level of disaster was approximately the same - if we won't make it to the midnight, all the last year hard work renders equal to zero.
What happened next. An hour before deadline he finally finished. On the web portal where we were supposed to upload it some disturbances occured. We had to solve in minutes before midnight. The support of course doesn't work now. And now.. Jake shares me the doc with work distribution.
Of course I had no opportunity to check it before deadline.
Did he apologize for that? Nope, he said "complain to someone else" when I let him know his collaboration style harms me.
Who dealt with all the bureaucratic mess to re-submit the table of distribution? Guess it. Hint: not the one who created the headache.
Another way to create precarity for others - treating them in the way "my time is more valuable than yours". Short-term shifts/cancellations of meeting/calls is a bright example. While you are in mode of adaptation to constant changes, you are not in the mode of personal development. Reactiveness inhibits proactiveness.
..The evening of upload disaster I communicate the team that, despite that Jake has claimed himself to the company we did the work for as the project leader, from now on I take the guidance on my hands. And they better not ignore it. The message was met silently.
Next day I check the table of distribution thorougly and find some my contributions not indicated, as well as 'the strategy'. I ask Jake, if he already submitted it somewhere without my consent. He avoids to answer directly and keeps redirecting me on another teammate. The latter does the same to Jake.
I escalate the issue to the advisor and start elaborating a plan to prepare the final speach and presentation without any fuss. To discuss and agree the plan, I set a call. The time for the call was assigned by Jake for his convenience (as it usually was the case). At the beginning of the call he texts that he cannot participate, and "anyway planned to be present not more than 15 mins".
The call where we elaborated a streamlined structure of next work, took us 2 hours. I resumed the result for Jake in a very detailed file. One of the agreements there was to provide our updated slides till intern deadline, so that I can apply the unified design to all the slides. At the deadline I will assume everyone's slides ready.
Till the intern deadline Jake doesn't collaborate, I assume his slides ready.
A day before the defense, when the final presentation was uploaded, Jake requested to add page numbers.
-Is it only alteration? I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CHECK IT till midnight and then it might be late to upload. - I asked him, and the caps part was my huge mistake.
Jake read it instanteously and answered in 40 minutes:
At the last moment I learnt he remade a lot on his own, without any agreement.
It didn't make the presentation worse, so why I make point a of this.
Because he basically ignored my instructions when I managed to lead the teamwork smoothly and streamlined, after he had leaded the teamwork to the disaster, and managed to impose his last-minute standard once again by lying.
While behavior in zero-sum manner is to be attributed not to the gender but to the personal integrity of a particular person, some studies (f.e. Cindi May, 2012) show that men tend to have lower ethical standards in competitive context.
