Women, including those who work in senior positions for some of Britain’s leading firms, are held back from reaching the very highest levels in business because of the difficulties they find in striking the right tone of language during high-pressure meetings.
The claim is made by linguistics expert Judith Baxter, who undertook an 18-month study into the speaking patterns of men and women at meetings in seven major companies, including two in the FTSE-100 Index.
The research found that women were four times more likely than men to be self-deprecating, use humor and speak indirectly or apologetically when broaching difficult subjects with board members to avoid conflict. And it doesn’t always work.
Baxter said such language was used because women were often heavily outnumbered on boards. As a result, senior women engage in a kind of linguistic second-guessing, adjusting their language to make the right impact on colleagues.
Examples included using phrases such as: “I am probably speaking out of turn, but ...” and “Sorry to cut across you like that, but...”
When employed effectively, this kind of language could be a useful tool to manipulate those around them, she said, but self-deprecation and an apologetic style were risky because striking a wrong note could lead to appearing defensive and weak.
Baxter, a lecturer in applied linguistics at Aston University, said women were left open to accusations that they were not fully in control of their arguments, which could lead to a loss of authority: “They have to work really hard to hit the right note with their colleagues.”
Baxter said she heard one woman director, who had spoken only twice in a meeting, say: “Sorry, sorry, I’m talking too much, I’m talking too much.”
According to the annual Female FTSE Board report from Cranfield University School of Management, the proportion of women on the boards of FTSE-100 companies is only 12.5 percent.
“I found very few differences between male and female leadership language, but there was this one key difference, which I call double-voice discourse [DvD]. Women use this when they are facing criticism or handling conflict. While men tend to be direct and straight talking, and if they are confrontational it is regarded as nothing personal, women avoid being directly confrontational and use a range of strategies to preserve a range of alliances, if not friendships. I am not saying that women are more sharing and caring than men. I am not saying they are more altruistic. They are doing it to achieve their own agenda,” Baxter said.
However, Baxter added that the difficulty in mastering such language not only made it difficult for women to progress, but may put many off aiming for top positions.
She said women appeared to use DvD only when greatly outnumbered by men. Karren Brady, West Ham United Football Club’s vice-chair and star of the BBC show The Apprentice, did not need to use the linguistic tricks, she had noticed.
However, Helena Morrissey, 44, recently named one of the most influential woman in London, who oversees investments worth ￡47 billion (US$76.26 billion) as well as her family of nine children, said she recognized Baxter’s findings from her own experiences.
“It is hard to generalize because there is a spectrum, but the women I have worked with certainly don’t seek confrontation and would tend to try to avoid it, which would be consistent with this pre-empting of criticism and anxiety, I suppose; hedging, using humor to soften things,” she said.
“Some men enjoy a fight, enjoy confrontation, but I don’t think I’ve met any women who want to spark an argument, while I have seen men in the context of mainly male-orientated boardrooms or senior discussion almost seem to push somebody to have that discussion in a quite confrontational way. It is not only that women speak differently, they are also trying to avoid what will happen next. This is their style to get there,” she said.
Morrissey, chief executive of money management firm Newton, said she did not want women to start acting like men, but to be conscious of their language.
“It may be seen as a bit of weakness on the part of women, because you are not playing the game in the same way. Maybe subconsciously there is a feeling that this person isn’t as decisive, can’t hold her own, is unsure of her arguments,” she said.
“Don’t say: ‘You aren’t going to like this,’ just say it and know that is not making yourself be like the man. You will get your point across and no one is going to think badly [of you]. Well they might, but that is all part of the discussion and the hammer and tongs,” she said.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS