Women are seen as more risk-avoidant in the workplace, and some have argued that this contributes to occupational gender gaps. In this research, we examined the role of consequences of workplace risk-taking in determining the likelihood of taking future risks at work
By: Thekla Morgenroth, Michelle Ryan and Cordelia Fine
Posted on 18 April 2022
Key findings
We found no evidence for overall gender differences in initial risk-taking, and women and men anticipated similar consequences for risks with which they have no experience. However, this stands in contrast to the consequences of risk-taking they have experienced. Here, men reported on average more positive consequences, even for those risks that are more normative for women, translating into a higher likelihood of taking the same risks again.
When faced with the same consequences, women and men were equally likely to take the same risks again. Our findings challenge the simple assumption that women are averse to workplace risks and suggest that if and when women do avoid risks, it is because their risk-taking leads to less rewarding consequences. Workplace gender equality initiatives should therefore tackle any inequities of consequences rather than encouraging women to “lean in” and take more risks.
Contact
You may also like
01
Jul
Addressing work-related gendered violence against Victorian healthcare workers
Work-related gendered violence is pervasive in the Victorian healthcare sector and harms employees’ physical and mental wellbeing, financial and work outcomes, the quality of care provided, and the healthcare sector as a whole. We are working with The Health and Community Services Union (HACSU) as research partners on their project, to understand the current state of work-related gendered violence in the sector, bring together the available evidence and offer evidence-based solutions to this systemic issue.
12
Jul
Recognising subtle forms of workplace discrimination
Blatant acts of sexism are no longer tolerated in most workplaces, but that doesn’t mean that sexism has disappeared. Although most employees have experienced or witnessed workplace incivility, those experiences are more frequent among women and racial minorities. 'Selective incivility' (i.e., microaggressions directed toward marginalized groups) is the new, more subtle form of prejudice that is difficult to formally censor because the behavior is often ambiguous, and it is nearly impossible to prove discriminatory intent. New research with Professor Michelle Ryan and collaborators shows that our identity (who we are) shapes our reactions to these ambiguous situations in our workplace (how we see things). In fact, it even affects our perceptions of discrimination. Specifically, when we highly identify with our workplace—a sense of attachment that ordinarily offers benefits for employee motivation and engagement—it can also hinder our ability to recognize mistreatment when it occurs.
30
Jan
Why we need to stop trying to "fix" women
To address the persistence of gender inequalities, many workplace gender equality interventions have been designed and implemented by governments, gender equality practitioners, professional bodies, and organisations. In this review article we provide a critical appraisal of the literature to establish an evidence base for why "fixing" women is unlikely to be a successful approach to achieving gender equality in career trajectories.