If
you are about to mediate or investigate an all-female conflict at work, watch
out for a tendency to view it harshly. New research from the University of
British Columbia's business school suggests men and women perceive conflict
between two women co-workers as being more harmful and doing more irreparable
damage than conflicts between men. (1)
Participants
were asked to make judgements on a scale of one to seven on the likelihood that the two managers would be
able to repair their relationship going forward, and the extent to which the conflict would affect
their job satisfaction and commitment to the company.
Participants rated those involved in all-female conflicts as also being more likely to let the argument negatively influence job satisfaction than male-female or male-male quarrellers.
The study also found that female experiment participants were just as likely as males to see the all-female conflict as more negative.
Participants rated those involved in all-female conflicts as also being more likely to let the argument negatively influence job satisfaction than male-female or male-male quarrellers.
The study also found that female experiment participants were just as likely as males to see the all-female conflict as more negative.
"I
think people perceive female conflict negatively because it violates the way
they think women should be," researcher Leah Sheppard told CBC News in
an interview. "We want them to be always nurturing and kind and
supportive."
It's an assumption that people don't impose whenever men deal with each other, even in a hostile way, she says.
"We are hard-pressed to think of a term comparable to 'catfight' that is regularly used to label conflict and competition between two men," she notes. "This term is troubling because it dehumanizes women and suggests that competition and conflict between women is akin to a disease when, in reality, moderate amounts of same-sex hostility are natural and expected across [men and women.]"
It's an assumption that people don't impose whenever men deal with each other, even in a hostile way, she says.
"We are hard-pressed to think of a term comparable to 'catfight' that is regularly used to label conflict and competition between two men," she notes. "This term is troubling because it dehumanizes women and suggests that competition and conflict between women is akin to a disease when, in reality, moderate amounts of same-sex hostility are natural and expected across [men and women.]"
We
all have our hooks which make it difficult for us to see things as they are and
remain impartial. What do you think? What implications does this have for training
workplace mediators and investigators? Do we concentrate too much on the
technical side and not enough on the pitfalls of human bias?
We
would love to hear your view. Get in touch.
John
Crawley
