Press "Enter" to skip to content

Stepping on the Third Rail: The Value of Diversity7 min read

A response to The New York Times, “Harvard Business School Case Study: Gender Equity” and the SWIB SGOV Panel
by Zoe Fuller-Young, MBA/MPA Class of 2015

swib_1

For those who didn’t read past the point of realizing how long the Times article actually was, fear not.  The content is becoming less relevant than the subsequent debate. More than anything, it was an anthropological study of HBS overall and specifically HBS’s recent program to eradicate gender grade disparity and attract/retain more female faculty. Their big question was “What if HBS gave itself a gender makeover, changing its curriculum, rules and social rituals to foster female success?” The program was remarkably successful, significantly increasing the number of female Baker Scholars (top 5% of class).

My initial reaction to the piece was twofold. On the positive side, it’s refreshing and encouraging that an elite, “don’t fix it if it’s not broken” institution such as Harvard is willing to invest resources into promoting an historically marginalized group in their “last mile” to equality (Julie Fajgenbaum). Furthermore, the effort was data-driven and succeeded. Author Jodi Kantor exposed the intricacies of a world still dominated by men and elite, and awareness is the first step.

On the less positive side, I, like many of the students in the study, found the process that HBS faculty and administration created to be patronizing. Why weren’t students, both men and women, involved in its creation? Was it really necessary to keep the objectives from the students?

I appreciate that Kantor surfaced multiple forms of inequality in business school, but I thought it was a missed opportunity to go beyond the anthropological study into an analysis of the connections among gender, class, and dating. For those who did make it past the first three paragraphs, you’ll know that the article dove into issues of class and the impact of partying as a “school-sanctioned form of networking.” (Slate).

There also seemed to be a lack of awesome men’s voices in this story, although there was a rebuttal article by an HBS student who lamented the same issue, noting that these men do exist there. And, seriously… the shining example of a successful woman was one who lost 100 lbs and is happily dating?

Does this apply at Stern? Yes and no. Yes because we are all pursuing careers “in business” which is still disproportionately led by men. To Marciano’s point, there is a structure we’re adapting into, and the paradigm was built by one gender. Yes because the top 10 students of 2013 were all men. Yes and no based on SWIB’s quick survey where 3% of respondents reported observing gender bias. No because we are, as the panelists argued, a more adaptable and entrepreneurial environment with less traditional roles for all community members. No because we have a higher percentage of women students which naturally changes the dynamic. No because, for better and worse, we are not an Ivy, elite, “old boys club” in the same way as Harvard. If we had a “Section X” (Block 100?), I’m pretty sure they’d still invite me to their parties (please?). If you read the long-form article about John Sexton in the New Yorker, you’d get a flavor for why NYU is so different from Harvard.

Let’s take a step back from the oh-so-easy detail criticisms of one article and whether or not the symptoms apply here. It’s less about the content than the discussion and what it means for us as a community that defines itself on collaboration and diversity of thought.

swib_2

Based on the great conversation on the 25th and my own point of view, there are a few reasons why gender parity matters. First, let’s assume our shared goal is to create a better, smarter, world. Next, we’ll acknowledge that numerous empirical studies have found that diversity of thought lead to better decisions (thanks to Annie McWilliams for voicing the necessity of articulating the business value of diversity). Next, let’s agree that each of our success in life should be based on our own hard work and treatment of others: We want a meritocracy. Finally, we need leadership to get there. We can then surmise that diversity + meritocracy + leadership = better world (shocking) with the caveat that this equation only works with metrics.

So how do we get there from a gender perspective? We need to “step on the third rail,” acknowledging innate differences between men and women in an effort to redefine success and leadership. There are some positive stereotypically female qualities that are hugely beneficial for business such as negotiation, judging risk, clearly communicating, and empathizing with direct reports. A recent HBR article explains that women are often better leaders and the reason why more men are elected is because they have more hubris, mistakenly perceived as leadership potential. The article argues that “…arrogance and overconfidence are inversely related to leadership talent — the ability to build and maintain high-performing teams, and to inspire followers to set aside their selfish agendas in order to work for the common interest of the group. Indeed, whether in sports, politics or business, the best leaders are usually humble — and whether through nature or nurture, humility is a much more common feature in women than men.” In sum, women (although not all of us!) are born with/are cultured to adopt certain leadership-beneficial qualities that men are not (as much). Instead of leaning in by focusing on what has historically worked for men, we should reassess what is going to make a better world and enable individuals to be the best they can be.

swib_3

Marciano categorized the typical (and often tiresome) conversation of the gender gap in leadership as #1 Blame the victim, #2 Man-bash, or #3 Shift the structural paradigm. As I’ve expressed, we should go with #3. I believe that it is the paradigm that will get us through the last mile, and that we need to be willing to “step on the third rail” to get there. I’ve mentioned positive differences of women in this article, but obviously there are negative stereotypes as well and areas where men might be naturally more skilled than women.

In the end, this is about the equation (diversity + meritocracy + leadership). That means that it’s about men and women, and what we all want from our lives. It’s not as much about a glass ceiling or sexism or women leaning out, it’s about what women want, which studies show is job satisfaction, meaning at work, daily happiness, balance, and power (not just money). Men also want these things, but simultaneously face societal pressure to provide for their family. As Dolly Chugh has argued, perhaps we need to focus on gender roles in the home if we’re ever going to get to the finish line.

swib_4

This lunch discussion could simply serve as a stand-alone gesture by NYU Stern (though the action of SWIB and S-Gov), engaging in this type of discussion and using its network to have the author of the article present. Bravo. Yet, given the energy in the room and flood of emails in the aftermath of the event, SWIB is going to carry the torch (get it?) further. The next steps are still being refined, but be prepared for a continued conversation and debate directed toward a substantive result. Sonia Marciano challenged us to create a way to gather data on metrics that matter to us. Perhaps we will drive Jenn Wynn’s suggestion of asking faculty members to take the Implicit Association Test (created by none other than Harvard) so that professors can be more aware of – and address – their own biases. Or, maybe we can work through LDI to redefine leadership and success. I hope and believe that as Sternies, we all do our best to “take the moral high road” and, from time to time, put ourselves in peril in the attempt at a better world.

Be First to Comment

  1. support technicians March 9, 2014

    Heya i am for the first time here. I found this board and I find It really useful & it helped me out much.

    I hope to give something back and aid others like you aided me.

Comments are closed.

Mission News Theme by Compete Themes.