11 ways to help women speak up 📣

Last week we looked at the barriers stopping women from speaking up and the cost to their organisations when women are silenced.

If you missed it, you can read: Why won’t these silly women speak up?

Now that we know why it matters…

It’s time for action.

There are countless ways to take action.

I’ve picked 11 of my favourite, just to get you started.

Hepeating is when a man repeats an idea that was shared by a woman, as though it’s a brand new idea.

Aaand the man gets the credit for it.

There are loads of ways to combat hepeating.

One of my favourites is amplification.

Amplification was popularised by female staffers in Obama’s White House.

It’s this simple:

When a woman makes a key point, someone else repeats it and gives direct credit.

For example, “Sarah, that’s a really important insight. Thank you for flagging that missing perspective.”

That’s it.

Simply naming and crediting helps prevents that idea from being credited to someone else.

(And no, this can’t be your whole gender equity strategy! It’s a tool for people with less power to support and advocate for each other. It doesn’t replace strategic investment from senior leaders).

As an inclusive and accessible communication consultant, I offer coaching.

I coach people to become more inclusive and accessible communicators.

And I also coach people whose managers say things like:

• “She’s terrible at communicating. She puts emoijs in emails.”

• “She uses too many exclamation marks.”

• “She lacks gravitas. She’s always peppering her messages with ‘I hope you’re well’ and ‘no worries if not’.”

• “I can’t take her seriously because she says ‘um’ and ‘ah’ too much.”

How interesting. 👀

Yes, women and other minoritised people do tend to hedge more.

But why?

Well, if we send a direct email (“hi, you’ve missed the deadline. When can I expect the report?”) we are more likely to be criticised for being “cold”, abrasive or lacking people skills.

It’s not helpful to say:

• Women just be more direct!

• Women, just ask for what you need!

• Women, just be more confident!

Unless changing the standards by which women (and other minoritised people) are assessed.

It is helpful to:

• Use frameworks for assessing people’s contributions at work, so you can see the content of their work,

• Flag if promotion/project assessment conversations focus on someone’s likeability, warmth or “tone.” Bring it back to the actual evidence,

• Say something like “I notice we’re talking about how much Kiran says sorry. As we’re hear to review performance, let’s bring this conversation back to Kiran’s key performance indicators. What do you notice about them?”1

Research suggests that men often get promoted based on potential, while women are promoted based on proven track record.

Women’s feedback at work tends to be vague and less actionable.

We’re more likely to use:

• agentic or “doing” language about men (“he led the team to success”)

• communal language for women2 (“she supported the team”)

When giving feedback, be as specific as possible.

For example “the report you shared was clear and very detailed. I made changes to X and Y because of Z”.

When giving feedback, be as fair as possible.

• root feedback in observable behaviours

• avoid personality-based feedback. (What is seen as “leadership” in men can often be seen as “aggressive” or “bossy” in women.)

• avoid being overly nice to women. (Feedback givers tend to prioritise being kind in their feedback to women and this often holds women back in the workplace.)

Being kind is nice, but not if it:

• blocks people from learning,

• hides actionable insights,

• denies people the chance to grow

• and is unequally distributed (research finds that men get constructive feedback without such an emphasis on being nice)

If you’re not sure, swap the gender and see if it is still valid (“flip it to test it”), especially if you’re about to give feedback!

Researchers at Cornell University found that people are more likely to call women - even fictional ones - by their first name, and men by their surname and title (or just their surname).

Kamala versus Trump.

The upside is that using first names can make people more “approachable” says Stav Atir. The downside? It’s often seen as “lower status.”

Informal language is not the problem.

It’s the unequal application of familiar, friendly, low status language.

By using their first name, women are often demoted.

Do:

• use women’s professional titles,

• name people of all genders consistently (whatever you pick, just apply it to everyone).

Feedback is a gift. We can’t grow without it.

We absolutely should comment on people’s actions, and their impact.

But… you don’t need to call anyone:

• shrill,

• bossy,

• crazy (or any other of the hellish gendered insults)

• angry (this one is massively racialised, Black women are very often stereotyped as angry or hostile)

• overly emotional (hmm, are they? Or are they having a completely reasonable response to an un-reasonable situation. Often, anger is an apt response.)

Side note: I would love if “emotional” went from being a gendered insult to a compliment. I want leaders to be connected to (and responsible for) their emotions!

Unstructured meetings typically favour the loudest voices.

That’s tough on introverts, folks with processing delays and differences (many neurodivergent people), and anyone who just doesn’t fancy battling to speak over Jeremy. (I’m so sorry if you’re a Jeremy who doesn’t speak over others. #NotAllJeremys).

If you have a question about parental leave, when would you ask it in this meeting?

Agenda: 1 hour for “company updates.”

When would you ask your question? Is it clear?

OK, let’s try again.

When would you ask it in this meeting?

• Agenda:

  • 15 mins for “financial updates”

  • 15 mins for “updates about the board”

  • 15 mins for “staff wellbeing, benefits and leave updates”

  • 15 mins for “Summer party”

Personally, I’m picking the second meeting.

Roughly half way through the meeting there’s time for “wellbeing, benefits and leave updates.”

Also, if Tim from accounts starts monologue-ing again about the accounting software, there will be a time limit! (#NotAllTims).

Having a structure for a meeting:

• keeps the meeting focused

• keeps it on time

• can create psychological safety to ask questions

• shares the load of admin work between the team, reduces risk of women taking on non-promotable tasks (note-taking, scheduling)

• and so much more!

Women are 44% more likely to volunteer for non-promotable tasks (Babcock et al, 2017).

Non-promotable tasks tend to include: taking notes, scheduling, organising office parties, and so on.

(Unless they’re in your job description. They’re obviously promotable tasks if your job is office manager or events co-ordinator!)

These tasks are incredibly important. But if they’re not a defined part of your role, they’re unlikely to count towards promotion.

• Create a rota. Rotating these tasks, so you share the burden for the important tasks that keeps things running, and combating sexism in the workplace.

• Tanya Reilly writes about “being glue.” Read more about glue work or office housework if you care about this.

There are huge barriers to women speaking up and challenging inequity at work.

It’s one of the reasons whisper networks can be such an important tool for justice and safety (though they also bring challenges).

Create anonymous systems to help people speak up.

You can use anonymous tools during workshops, webinars, and so on. Use tools like slido or mentimeter to poll people.

I use anonymous tools like this a lot when I’m teaching inclusive language.

Because it can be unsafe for someone to say something - especially if they’re the “only” in their team (like the only Black woman or Muslim - it can be obvious who’s saying what).

They can usually speak more freely without fear of how they’ll be perceived.

If a man asks the first question in a Q&A, the gender balance of further questions tips towards more of them being asked by men.

If a woman asks the first question, participation is significantly more proportional (Davenport et al., 2014).

What can you do?

Consciously take the first question from a woman.3

Gender experts often recommend a “no interruptions” rule.

Because women are so much more likely to be interrupted (usually by men).

For example, a study of U.S. Supreme Court arguments found that male justices interrupt female justices 3 times more often than they interrupt other men (Jacobi & Schweers, 2017).

But i’s not neuro-inclusive to completely ban interruptions.

Because ADHers and many other neurodivergent folks often communicate through overlapping (which might be called: a whole load of interruptions).

We build on each other’s contributions (often by interrupting in an enthusiastic, constructive way like: “amazing point! I love how you said that, let me build on it with…”). When I’m chatting with another ADHDer, we’re likely to interrupt each other dozens of times throughout the conversation (and we’re often both very happy with this! It can be a form of un-masking).

Interruptions are not always harmful. It depends who’s being interrupted, when, why, and what the impact is on them.

So consider:

• talking about this with your team,

• co-creating some agreements that work well for you,

• auditing who speaks (if you’re comfortable with AI tools, some tools can monitor who speaks for what percentage - for example, my Fathom warns me if I’m in ‘monologue mode’. I am offended by it every time… but it’s helpful).

OK, that’s it!

I’ve focused on communication, cos you know. that’s my jam.

You obviously have to combine this with actual structural changes (pay audits, flexible working and leave policies, and so on).

This is just a starting point.

Want more? Check out:

• How to take sexism and male default thinking out of your language.

• Are you being too polite?

• Why won’t these silly women speak up?

What 1 thing are you going to do differently?

And what have I missed?

What would you add to this list?

Hit reply to let me know! I read all of them.

(And people are often incredibly surprised when I reply! It really is me on the other end of this email, not a bot).

Beep boop,

Ettie 🤖