Who wins in the court of public opinion largely depends on how effectively each side communicates its stance. If actors and writers can effectively convey how their demands resonate with most Americans — fair compensation, better working conditions and fears of replacement by AI — they will likely retain audience sympathy despite disruptions. Moreover, celebrities often have large social media followings and can leverage these platforms to share their perspectives directly with fans.
Catherine Tinsley is a professor of management at Georgetown University and director of the university's Women’s Leadership Institute.
Siting one field study she and her colleagues had undertaken, she said, "women increased their self-confidence when they changed the mental relationship they had with failures."
On April 20, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, owned by Transocean and leased by British Petroleum (BP), exploded, killing 11 crewmembers and injuring several more. Millions of gallons of oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico, with devastating consequences for the environment and significant economic impacts on the fishing and tourism industries.
Catherine Tinsley, a professor of management at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business, said researchers had found that corporate boards were more likely to appoint women to positions of power — as leaders or to positions on boards — if their companies were struggling.
Our remote worlds can also make it tougher to brainstorm creatively, said Catherine Tinsley, a professor of management at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business.
“We have to be much more intentional about group meetings and much more intentional about who’s speaking and when we’re speaking,” said Tinsley. “And I think as a leader in a group meeting, it forces you to be a little bit more intentional about taking charge and equalizing the amount of time speaking.”
Another tool, from Catherine Tinsley, professor at Georgetown University McDonough School of Business and executive director of the university's Women's Leadership Institute, is to focus on recovery, not the likelihood of failure. "Success is not the absence of failure," says Tinsley. "Success means you had failure but you picked yourself up again. It's really the only way to lead."
“As you move up the corporate ladder, that’s where pay becomes much more discretionary, and there are a lot more things other than pay—privileges, bonuses, things that people don’t think to ask for—that could be on the table,” says Cathy Tinsley, a professor of management at Georgetown University.
“The ways in which we process information about risk make it difficult for us to understand how risky it is to be in contact with others,” professor Catherine Tinsley of Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business told Fox News. “There is something called a ‘near miss’ bias, which is: when people engage in an activity that they know has some risk but then nothing bad happens to them, they tend to ignore that the good outcome was partly due to luck.”
The researchers, Catherine Tinsley, a professor of management at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business and faculty director of GU’s Women’s Leadership Institute, and Kate Purmal, an Institute senior industry fellow, wrote: “Our data suggests corporate boards have been finding a creative way out of this chicken-and-egg dilemma. Specifically, they seem to have relaxed the prior-CEO-experience requirement for women and are using prior corporate board service as a proxy qualification.”
The researchers, Catherine Tinsley, a professor of management at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business and faculty director of GU’s Women’s Leadership Institute, and Kate Purmal, an Institute senior industry fellow, wrote: “Our data suggests corporate boards have been finding a creative way out of this chicken-and-egg dilemma. Specifically, they seem to have relaxed the prior-CEO-experience requirement for women and are using prior corporate board service as a proxy qualification.”
The question for women leaders is not if they will fail, but how they recover, according to Catherine Tinsley, professor at Georgetown University McDonough School of Business and executive director of the university's Women's Leadership Institute. She says too much emphasis is placed on preventing failure and not enough on acknowledging that it is going to happen.
An article by Cathy Tinsley, Raffini Family Professor of Management and director, Georgetown Women’s Leadership Institute and Emily Amanatullah, senior policy scholar: “Though general participation in the U.S. workforce has achieved gender equality in terms of men and women (women are exactly 50 percent of the non-farm U.S. workforce as of January 2019), we are far from parity within actual jobs.”
An article by Cathy Tinsley, Raffini Family Professor of Management at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business and the faculty director of the Georgetown University Women’s Leadership Institute: “The news about U.S. women’s presence in the C-suite — and especially the CEO job — has been pretty bleak. Nationwide, fewer than 5% of CEOs of public companies are women. In the Fortune 500, that number fell by 25% from 2017 to 2018, dipping from 32 (6.4%) to 24 (4.8%), before rising back in 2019.”
This doesn’t prove that board experience was the reason the women were hired as CEOs. But the researchers think there’s a strong case for correlation. “First, as board members these women get into the executive network, thus when companies are looking to create a candidate pool for an outside CEO appointment, these women’s names are more likely to be surfaced than if they had not been part of the board network,” Catherine H. Tinsley, a management professor at Georgetown’s McDonough School of Business, tells Quartz. “Second, board service gives these women opportunities to show their skills and leadership abilities to people outside their own firm.”
As Catherine Tinsley and Robin Ely write in the Harvard Business Review, “on average, the sexes are far more similar in their inclinations, attitudes, and skills than popular opinion would have us believe. There are “sex differences in various settings, including the workplace—but those differences are not rooted in fixed gender traits. Rather, they stem from organizational structures, company practices, and patterns of interaction that position men and women differently, creating systematically different experiences for them.”
“All the personal information she put out there made Sandberg more likable and more trustworthy", said Catherine Tinsley, a professor at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. “People conflated this likability and trustworthiness, thinking she has their back, and actually what she has is the corporation’s back.””
“If you see gender differences in placement, then you should first be asking if there is something about the context or the environment that is positioning men and women differently,” says Catherine Tinsley, the Raffini Family Professor of Management at Georgetown University.
Research shows there’s no huge difference in confidence levels between men and women. Yet “empowertising” is designed to lead women to believe otherwise. The more we discuss how much help women need, Tinsley says, the more workplaces perpetuate a system that keeps women feeling isolated and inferior to their male counterparts.
Three Georgetown University researchers – economists Adriana Kugler and Olga Ukhaneva and management professor Catherine Tinsley – wrote in a recent working paper that receiving low grades in a stereotypical male discipline where men already are overrepresented may present a potent combination of disincentives for women to continue their studies in that field.
In a recent paper titled “Gender Diversity on U.S. Corporate Boards: Are We Running in Place?” O’Reilly and coauthors Catherine Tinsley from Georgetown University, James Wade from George Washington University, and Brian Main from the University of Edinburgh analyzed archival board data from 3,000 American publicly traded companies over 10 years. After that analysis revealed that a woman is more likely to be appointed to another woman’s seat, while a man is more likely to be appointed to another man’s seat, the researchers replicated the effect in lab studies.
Tax Day is yet another reminder of the persistent and pervasive gender pay gap, the corrosive effect it has on women’s lifetime earnings and therefore, on their retirement security. Sadly, according to the Certified Equality Professional Institute, on average women have 50 percent smaller account balances in their retirement plans than men.
A big part of the challenge is organizing. Having already brought millions of women together, the Women’s March provides an opportunity. On International Women’s Day, its leaders organized boycotts, even forcing the closure of a few school districts to protest President Trump’s policies. Yet critics say it was a lost opportunity. “If you’re going to do a power move, you have to couple that with a clear demand,” said Catherine Tinsley, an expert in gender leadership at Georgetown University.
“A billion women will enter the workforce in the next decade. Think about how important confidence will be to their success,” said Dr. Catherine H. Tinsley, the Raffini Professor of Management at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business and Academic Director of the Georgetown University Women’s Leadership Institute. “Confident people are more likely to solve problems, be more innovative at work and work independently. Therefore, businesses have a real incentive to cultivate worker confidence.”
In the U.S., even though the law has been in place for over 50 years, harassment persists, says Catherine Tinsley, PhD, because “men have more social status.” Tinsley, a professor of management at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business, says that such sexual advances are a power play and a way to put a woman who is being particularly “uppity” in her place. “That’s not the way it should be,” she underscores. “It’s the way it is.” Which is why it is important to report any instance of harassment.
Strikingly, we found that when people had been exposed to this organizational message to reposition failure their confidence increased, which had a direct impact on their business success. These salespeople had, on average, 22% higher sales and 27% higher sales productivity than those members who did not receive this message.
As hurried holiday shoppers fill their baskets with gifts, they confront the recurring dilemma of too much choice. So naturally to make their shopping more efficient, people adopt short-cuts--making lists and a plan of attack before entering a mall or trying to pick up all their gifts in one place. One such short-cut, though, should give us all pause: gender-targeted toys.
If Clinton is elected, we might see some subtle changes, like seeing more women in places of power. What we know about networks and homosocial reproduction tells us that she's likely to appoint more women to senior posts, just as Obama did with African Americans during his two terms. The phenomenon is not necessarily an implicit bias, but a natural outcome of the people she knows and the people in her network.
Unfortunately, we are still underserving our female athletes, at least relative to their male counterparts. Despite participation progress, a stubborn gender gap persists in scholarship dollars, team operating budgets, coaching salaries, and even player salaries.
The ads encouraging us to buy gifts and greeting cards suggest that what dads mostly do is use tools, grill meat, enjoy sports and cars, and relax (with a beer or a mixed drink). These images and sentiments are confining, and we imagine discouraging, to some dads. Moreover, they don’t celebrate the paternal activities that really matter to kids and families.
Congratulations to the U.S. Treasury Department for its recent decision to put a woman on money. Harriet Tubman is set to replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill by 2020. Naturally, there is poetic justice in replacing a slave holder with a woman who fought so tirelessly for emancipation. Yet, there are two other reasons why the face of a woman on U.S. currency notes is so healthy for American culture and why this current decision does not go far enough.
President Obama recently announced new steps to advance equal pay including a proposal that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in partnership with the Department of Labor collect and report summary pay data by gender, race, and ethnicity from businesses with 100 or more employees. This is a giant leap toward identifying and ultimately rectifying wage inequities.
In a paper forthcoming in the Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Catherine H. Tinsley, professor of management at Georgetown's McDonough School of Business, and colleagues report on their study of 3,000 U.S. publicly traded firms from 2002-2011. They find that a woman is most likely to be appointed to a corporate board when another woman exits the board.
Women’s aversion to competition explains about a 10th of the gender pay gap among high-ability professionals, a recent study of young MBAs found, not only because women opt for less-aggressive fields but because men may do better when negotiating bonuses.
Making boards more diverse—in terms of gender and other factors—is now such a common goal that you’d think companies must have worked out how to do it by now. But researchers from the McDonough School of Business at Georgetown University have identified one big problem that stymies efforts to boost the ranks of female directors. It’s quite simple: women are more likely to be appointed to seats vacated by other women. When men step down, they are more likely to be replaced by men. “Our work underscores the importance of creating a pipeline of talented women in the workplace,” said Catherine Tinsley, the study’s author faculty director of Georgetown’s Women’s Leadership Institute, in a statement.
Much press has been dedicated to “the confidence gap” — the idea that women “self-handicap” because they lack confidence relative to men. Women who do not believe in themselves are less likely to try a new challenge, such as selling Tupperware, negotiating a raise, or leading a work team. Yet, without proof of their own success, these women never get the chance to change their own internal narratives about their abilities.
We, as a collective, socialize boys and girls to be different. We create and then amplify gender-based differences and then pass these along through both overt and subtle messages. Aside from the obvious anatomical differences, boys and girls are much more alike than they are different. Just a cursory scan of the broader scientific evidence makes this clear.
The artisans in Masoro are employees of Abahizi Dushygikirane Corporation or ADC, the supplier of Kate Spade & Company’s on purpose label, which launched in May 2014. Professors Catherine Tinsley and Edward Soule at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business are studying this socially responsible business model and its impact on the employees and their community.
But it’s not always obvious what a bad job looks like if you haven’t been in the workforce very long, said Catherine Tinsley, a Georgetown University management professor who researches workplace dynamics. Women, especially, are known to stay in work environments that aren’t conducive to career advancement, she said, because they are more conservative about taking job risks. Women are so aware of seeming annoying in a negotiation that some won’t negotiate at all, she said.
The Gender Pay Gap: A Call for Evidence-Based Change Initiatives. The Huffington Post (Nov. 16, 2015)
“How many more reports do we need?” I asked myself as I read through the latest one documenting (again) the gap in gender parity in organizations. This particular report, “Women in the Workforce”, featured a nice visual of how women are underrepresented at every level within organizations. And, of course, at higher organizational levels women comprise an even smaller percentage of the workforce than at lower organizational levels. Sigh…. I imagine two general responses: yawns from those for whom this conversation about gender equity has become tired and stale and frustration from those companies and executives who have been trying, for years, to achieve some sustainable change. I have a suggestion–let’s approach our intervention efforts to solve the equity problem with as much rigor and skepticism as we apply to our efforts to document the problem. What I am calling for here is “evidence-based change interventions.”
“Last year UN Women created the “He for She” campaign as a way of engaging men and boys to “stand up in addressing the inequalities and discrimination faced by women and girls.” I submit that males are already deeply embedded in issues of gender inequality, although they may not immediately recognize it. When it comes to parenting, society still has pretty rigid social roles about who should be doing what–and it is constraining all of us,” by Catherine Tinsley.
“We’ve all seen the headlines about how much money people spend on Mother’s Day — the National Retail Federation ranks it just behind the winter holidays (Christmas, Chanukah, Kwanza) in terms of gift spending. The idea of Mother’s Day is that we reward the selflessness of our mothers once a year, acknowledging how they often dedicate themselves to their family and household. Although I wholeheartedly endorse the appreciation of moms (and dads), the “give a card and gift to honor Mom once a year” mentality seems like a bit of a raw deal to me. More importantly, the traditional notion of Mother’s Day does not capture the reality of today’s mothers in many ways,” by Catherine Tinsley.
In a story circulating widely in the media, “W”, a newly minted Ph.D. received a faculty job offer from the philosophy department at Nazareth College in Pennsylvania and soon after, the school withdrew that offer. What crime did, W, a woman, apparently commit to cause such a dramatic censure? She negotiated.