Companies need to think about ways to encourage women to fight for the top corporate spots. One example to follow is the consulting firm Deloitte, which tries to ensure that female employees get considered for top assignments, and where at least 23 percent of senior management personnel are female. 6 Firms like Deloitte will soon find themselves better off for doing so, because they will be able to uncover the true top talent in their organization, a move that will positively affect their bottom line.
Additionally, talent recruiters need to get on board. Instead of truly understanding what a candidate does and doesn’t bring to the table, recruiters typically rely on their intuition. Sometimes companies hire people because they feel the applicant would “fit” in a job without realizing that they may be biased in favor of men.
Companies that are aware of such biases can include processes that work against this tendency. For example, at Campbell Soup Company (where a woman, Denise Morrison, is CEO), gender diversity is part and parcel of the company’s selling proposition because most of the people who buy its products are women. For that reason, the firm made a conscious decision to make sure that its leadership reflected people who looked like their customers.
Companies that understand why women react less to competitive incentives can use this information to their benefit, too. For example, the no-haggling Khasi market reminded us of a different market—auto dealerships in the United States. Many women hate the back-and-forth of “let me check with my manager” hassles that accompany a visit to buy a car. To address this, companies like Honda have tried to follow an idea first put forward by General Motors’ Saturn division, making no-haggle pricing part of its sales pitch. Though the Saturn division is gone, during its time its cars became very popular with women, who amounted to 63 percent of Saturn owners.
Policy Makers, Educators, and Parents
Policy makers, too, can do something to close the gender gap. If you are a policy maker, don’t apply bandages to old injuries when what we need is early, corrective surgery. For example, we are not sure Title IX, designed to level the playing field for female athletes, is the way to correct imbalances. Rather, ask yourself, “If we are going to create a more equitable society, what is the right point for intervention?” Given that differences in competitiveness spring partly from cultural influences, our investment in gender equality would probably be better spent on early childhood education and socialization than on making sure women’s basketball teams receive the same funding as men’s.
And if you are a parent, our studies have implications for the way you raise your kids. We are now convinced that investing in the self-confidence of our own girls is a lot like investing in retirement. Exposing our daughters to more competitive environments as they grow up, and especially early on, is vital. Such exposure is particularly important around the age of puberty.
When children are in school, gender biases can manifest themselves even with the most diligent parenting. Our work has shown that gender biases run deep and begin at an early age. 7 Educators and parents should raise their level of awareness of sex-typing with very young children, and take measures to combat it. Don’t be shy in encouraging kids, and in particular girls, to be competitive. Parents, teachers, and anyone who works with kids should really come to understand that socialization, and not only biology, determines competitive outcomes. There is nothing preordained about being good at math, playing with pink dolls or black trucks, competing in school or in sports, or anything else. Change the way children are socialized to react to incentives, and you change their future.
One silver bullet that has been proposed to completely change the face of socializing boys and girls is a return to