10 Tips for ManagersBrought to you by

LeanIn.Org

Gender bias is triggered by these deep-rooted

stereotypes of women and men. As Malcolm

Gladwell explores in Blink, we often rely on

unconscious beliefs and assessments to make

snap decisions—we think without thinking.2 Gender

stereotypes are one of these mental shortcuts;

we use them to filter information to simplify

the world around us. Unfortunately, this often

disadvantages women.

Gender bias leads us to systematically discount

women’s performance. Women receive less credit

for achievements than their male counterparts.3

And successful women are generally less well

liked than successful men.4

As a manager, you have a strong incentive to make

sure that women can succeed in your organization.

In the global war for talent, leveraging the full potential

of the population provides a serious competitive

advantage. Companies with more women in

leadership roles have been shown to perform better.5

The good news is that there are small adjustments

you can make to overcome gender bias on your

team and in your organization. As you do, all

ships will rise.

—Rachel Thomas

Co-founder and president of LeanIn.Org

If you ask a room full of women, “Have you ever been called aggressive or difficult at work?” almost

every hand goes up. If you ask a room full of men the very same question, only a few hands go up. Why

are women and men having such vastly different experiences?

Decades of social science research have taught us what we already know—stereotypes are enormously

self-reinforcing. Men are expected to be assertive, confident, and opinionated, so we welcome their lead-

ership. In contrast, women are expected to be kind, nurturing, and compassionate, so when they lead, they

are going against our expectations. A man who makes a tough decision at work is often seen as decisive,

while a woman who does the same may be seen as impulsive and brash.

Don’t underestimate bias: One study found

that replacing a woman’s name on a résumé with

a man’s can increase her “worthiness of

hire” by 60%.6

2

1. Push Back on the “Likeability Penalty”THE SITUATION > Women navigate a tightrope between being seen

as competent and being well liked. When a woman

exhibits leadership skills, such as speaking in a direct

style or promoting her ideas, she is often liked less

by her peers. If she is friendly and helpful, her peers

tend to like her but may be less apt to see her

as competent.7 This can have a big impact on a

woman’s career. Ask yourself: Who are you more

likely to support and promote, the man with high

marks across the board or the woman who has

equally high marks but is “just not as well liked”?

THE SOLUTION > Listen for the language of the likeability penalty.

When a woman is described as “aggressive,” “too

ambitious,” “out for herself,” or “not well liked,”

there’s a good chance this is the penalty in action.

Push the person making the comment for a specific

example of what the woman did. Then ask, “Would

you have the same reaction if a man did the same

thing?” In many cases, the answer will be no, and

you can surface the possibility that gender bias is

the culprit. If they push back, citing that men and

women have the same issues with her, remind

them that we’re all susceptible to bias—women are

more harshly judged by both genders. Finally, it’s

important to remember that you can fall into the

same bias traps; think carefully about your own

response to female coworkers.

Listen for the language of the

likeability penalty.

3

WHAT WOMEN CAN DO: FIND A WORK BUDDY

One way to combat these negative meeting dynamics is

to pair up with another woman and agree to advocate for

each other. You can reinforce her good ideas and ask for

her opinions, and she can do the same for you. When a

woman advocates for another woman, they both benefit.

— Shared by Gina Bianchini, CEO of Mightybell & co-founder of LeanIn.Org

2. Get Everyone to Sit at the Table & ParticipateTHE SITUATION > Compared to women, men talk more and make

more suggestions in meetings, while women are

interrupted more, given less credit for their ideas,

and have less overall influence.8 If you watch men

and women at the same job level, you will also notice

that more of the men sit in the front and center

seats, while women tend to gravitate toward the

end of the table and edge of the room in meetings—

away from the positions that convey status. Lack

of full participation often undermines outcomes;

but tapping into the skills and expertise of a diverse

group of employees can improve performance.9

THE SOLUTION > It’s important to make sure everyone speaks up and

is heard. Start by watching where your team sits in

meetings. Make sure women as well as men sit front

and center. Set a precedent that every voice counts

and establish a no interruptions rule to reinforce it.

If a colleague is cut off, interject and say you’d like

to hear her finish; this is good for her and elevates

your leadership. Openly ask women to contribute

to the conversation, and when they do contribute,

acknowledge their contributions by name.

4

1. Make Résumé Review Gender BlindHiring decisions are prone to gender bias, too—remember,

replacing a woman’s name on a résumé with a man’s can

significantly increase her chances of being hired.12 When reviewing

résumés for a job opening, consider making them gender

blind. After a major U.S. symphony introduced a blind audition

process—where musicians played behind a screen—a woman’s

odds of advancing to the next round increased by 50 percent.13

2. Watch “Creating a Level Playing Field”Watch “Creating a Level Playing Field” by Shelley Correll,

director of Stanford’s Clayman Institute for Gender Research,

to learn six strategies for reducing errors in decision making

and recognizing everyone’s best work. Use the discussion

guide to lead a team conversation on gender bias, or break

into small groups for more exploration and group exercises.

You’ll find everything you need at leanin.org/level-playing-field.

ACTIVITIES

3. Evaluate Performance FairlyTHE SITUATION > We all understand the importance of fair evaluations,

yet women are evaluated more harshly than men.10

This bias is more pronounced when review criteria

are unclear, and we’re more likely to rely on gut

feelings and personal inferences.11

THE SOLUTION > Awareness begets fairness. Make sure everyone

on your team is aware of the gender bias in

evaluating performance. Work with your team to

set expectations up front. Be specific about what

constitutes excellent performance, and make sure

goals are understood and measurable. The clearer

your criteria are, the better. Ask team members

to explain their evaluations—and ask the same of

yourself. When we’re accountable for our decisions,

we’re more motivated to think through them carefully.

Awareness begets

fairness.

5

WHAT WOMEN CAN DO: OWN YOUR SUCCESS

So often we deflect praise with

a self-deprecating comment like

“I got lucky” or “It was nothing.”

What a missed opportunity! Praise

can be hard to come by and goes

a long way toward establishing

your credibility. If nothing else,

smile and say, “Thank you.”

In two simple words, you’ve

owned your accomplishment and

communicated your appreciation.

— Shared by Roxane Divol, senior vice president of partner alliances, Symantec

4. Give Women Credit THE SITUATION > Ask a man to explain his success and he’ll typically

point to his innate qualities and skills. Ask a

woman and she’ll likely attribute her success

to external factors, insisting she did well because

she “worked really hard,” “got lucky,” or “had help

from others.”14 And it’s not just women who are

tough on themselves. All of us discount women’s

achievements. Women also get less credit than

their male counterparts for their role in team

accomplishments.15

THE SOLUTION > Make sure women get the credit they deserve and

look for opportunities to celebrate their success.

Help women identify their own success on a regular

basis with questions like “What progress have you

made since we last spoke?” or “What are you most

proud of this month?” Keep a running record of

their responses and have them to do the same.

6

5. Pay Women FairlyTHE SITUATION > Even if you adjust for number of hours worked,

on average women are paid less than men.16 Yet

fair compensation makes good business sense—

it can protect organizations from reputation

risks and can increase employee motivation.17

THE SOLUTION > Audit compensation across your team. Are

women getting paid as much as men at the

same level? Remember, fair pay begins with

evaluating performance correctly and giving

everyone full credit for their contributions.

DID YOU KNOW? The wage gap starts right

out of school: A recent study

found that women in their first

year out of college were paid

82 cents for every dollar

paid to their male peers.18

7

6. Encourage Women to NegotiateTHE SITUATION > Women are less likely to negotiate, often because

they are concerned they’ll be viewed unfavorably.

They are right to worry. We expect men to advocate

on their own behalf and be rewarded for their

accomplishments, so there’s little downside for

them when they negotiate, even fiercely. In contrast,

we expect women to be communal and collaborative,

so when they negotiate or advocate for themselves,

we often react unfavorably.19 Of course it follows

that women are less likely to receive equal pay

if they don’t negotiate actively.

THE SOLUTION > Communicate to all the members of your team—

especially the women—that it’s important for

them to ask for what they deserve. Research shows

that women will negotiate at comparable rates to

men when given explicit permission.20 In addition,

remember we’re all prone to penalize women when

they negotiate. Be conscious of this dynamic and

correct for it; you’ll set a good example for others.

WHAT WOMEN CAN DO: NEGOTIATE—BUT DO IT EFFECTIVELY!

First and foremost, you need to negotiate—you

won’t get what you don’t ask for. And when you do

negotiate, understand the gender stereotypes you

are fighting against and educate yourself about how

to do so effectively. Use communal language, since

women get better outcomes when they emphasize

a concern for organizational relationships.23 For

example, you can say, “My team exceeded all our

goals this year. We all deserve to be rewarded for

our accomplishments, including me.” Another way

to demonstrate a connection to others is to ground

the negotiation in gender pay issues: “Given that

women are paid less than men across the board,

we would both be disappointed if I didn’t negotiate

for myself.” Watch Stanford professor Margaret Neale’s

lecture at leanin.org/education/negotiation for other

strategies to prepare for your next negotiation.

DID YOU KNOW? Gender differences in the

willingness to negotiate contribute

to the underrepresentation of women

at the top. According to one study,

employees who negotiate are

promoted 17 months more quickly.22

DID YOU KNOW? Studies show that women

negotiate as effectively as

men on someone else’s behalf,

when their advocacy does

not appear self-serving.21

8

Audit Your Team’s Project WorkMake a list of the most common types of mission-critical

and service work your team does. Service work can be

anything from organizing birthday gifts to taking recruits

out to dinner. Then evaluate who is doing what. If the

women on your team are disproportionately doing

service work, make adjustments.

ACTIVITY

7. Distribute Work EquallyTHE SITUATION > A majority of women end up in support roles, but

line roles with P&L responsibility more often lead to

senior leadership positions.24 Women also tend to

take on more service work (e.g., organizing events,

training new hires, running team-building programs),

leaving less time for mission-critical work.25 Whether

women volunteer for these duties or are just

expected to take them on, service work rarely gets

someone noticed and promoted. When women are

asked a favor at work, they earn almost no social

capital for saying yes and are penalized for saying

no. Men, on the other hand, gain points for saying

yes and face minimal fallout for saying no.26 Over

time, these dynamics can have a serious impact

on a woman’s career trajectory.

THE SOLUTION > Audit who’s doing service work and make sure it’s

distributed equally. Pay attention to who volunteers

and what they volunteer for. Talk to the people

who don’t volunteer for high-profile assignments

to understand what’s holding them back—high

workload, lack of interest, fear they won’t deliver—

and help them work through their concerns.

WHAT WOMEN CAN DO: USE THE STRATEGIC NO

Volunteer for stretch projects that will

enhance your career. Then when people

ask you to take on undervalued work,

use what I call the strategic no. Simply

say, “I’m working with Jim on a project

that will open the door to an important

new client base, but this would be a

perfect stretch assignment for X down

the hall.” This way you can dodge the

project while communicating you’re a

good team player.

— Shared by Joan C. Williams, co-author of What Works for Women at Work

DID YOU KNOW? Two-thirds of executive women

in Fortune 200 companies are

in support roles, such as HR and

communications, but line roles

with P&L responsibility more

often lead to the C-suite.27

9

8. Encourage Women to Pursue OpportunitiesTHE SITUATION > Women tend to underestimate their skills and take

fewer risks than men.28 As a result, they may be

more hesitant to ask for high-profile projects or

apply for new opportunities.29 Even when women

have the desire, they don’t always have the flexibility

and support to go for it. This has a huge impact

on who ends up in leadership roles.

THE SOLUTION > Push back when a woman says she’s “not ready”

or “not qualified.” Remind her what she’s already

accomplished and how quickly she’s progressing.

In addition, make it easier for her—and everyone

on your team—to reach for opportunities and still

meet family responsibilities. Support and encourage

flexibility for everyone. Make it clear you value

results over face time and actively serve as a good

role model. If you talk openly about leaving early

for your son’s game, you signal to everyone that

it’s okay to make time for family.

DID YOU KNOW? Women are more likely than

men to suffer from the impostor syndrome, a phenomenon that plagues people with self-doubt.

Despite external evidence of their competence, they

feel like frauds.31

DID YOU KNOW? Research shows that men apply for jobs when they

meet 60% of the criteria, while women wait until they feel

they meet 100% of the criteria.30

10

9. Let Your Team Know You’ll Support Them Through PregnancyTHE SITUATION > Companies lose talented women during their

childbearing years—one study found that more than

40 percent of highly qualified women with children

choose to “off-ramp,”32 and more than a quarter

of them never rejoin the workforce.33 As a result,

organizations incur significant expense recruiting

and onboarding new employees and lose valuable

institutional knowledge and connections.34

THE SOLUTION > It’s not illegal to talk about pregnancy, only to

discriminate based on it.35 Let the women—and

men—on your team know you’ll support their

decision to start a family. Offer to talk to them if

and when they’re ready. They may not take you up

on it, but they’ll feel supported knowing your door

is open. Be explicit that you are asking so you can

help them—for example, assure them you won’t

start giving away the best assignments and that

their jobs will be waiting for them on their return.

Learn How to Talk About Pregnancy Read Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher &

Flom’s guidelines for talking to women

about pregnancy within the framework

of the law. Go to leanin.org/talking-about-pregnancy-at-work.

ACTIVITY

11

10. Mentor & Sponsor WomenTHE SITUATION > Mentorship and sponsorship are key drivers of

success, yet women can have a harder time finding

mentors and sponsors, especially those with lots

of influence.36 Mentoring relationships often form

between individuals with common interests.37 Men

end up gravitating toward other men, and since

there are more men in senior roles, women miss out.38

Moreover, junior women and senior men often avoid

mentoring relationships out of concern that a close

relationship—or even time spent together—will

look inappropriate.39

THE SOLUTION > We need more male managers to mentor and

sponsor junior women, and we should reward them

when they do. Establish formal mentorship and

sponsorship programs. Encourage informal

interactions between the women and men on your

team—personal connections lead to relationships

that can propel careers. Finally, look for ways to

make access to managers equal.

WHAT WOMEN CAN DO: 1. FOCUS ON AUTHENTIC CONNECTIONS

Too many young women start with, “Will you be my

mentor?” That’s an awfully big ask. More specific and

thoughtful questions are more effective—for example,

“I researched Competitor X and wonder why we don’t

compare our product features to theirs. Do you have a few

minutes to discuss?” I always feel compelled to spend a

few minutes answering, and over time these quick exchanges

lead to a deeper relationship that I feel invested in.

— Shared by Heather S. Burgess, associate director, Procter & Gamble

2. START A CIRCLE

Finding a mentor can be difficult, but peers can be just as

effective at offering guidance. This is the power of Lean In

Circles. These small self-organizing groups meet regularly

to harness the experience and creativity of all their members.

Research shows that people are more confident and are able

to learn and accomplish more in groups.41 Start or join your

own Circle today at leanin.org/circles, and invite men to join

the conversation too.

DID YOU KNOW? According to a recent report,

almost two-thirds of male

executives are hesitant to have

one-on-one meetings with

a more junior woman.40

12

The photographs in this document are from the Lean In Collection on Getty Images available at gettyimages.com/leanin.

LeanIn.OrgLeanIn.Org is the nonprofit organization

founded by Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg

to empower all women to achieve their

ambitions. LeanIn.Org offers inspiration and

support through an online community, free

expert lectures, and Lean In Circles,

small peer groups who meet regularly

to share and learn together.

leanin.org

13

1 Madeline E. Heilman and Tyler G. Okimoto, “Why Are Women Penalized for Success at Male Tasks? The Implied Communality Deficit,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 1 (2007): 81–92; and Madeline E. Heilman et al., “Penalties for Success: Reactions to Women Who Succeed at Male Gender-Typed Tasks,” Journal of Applied Psychology 89, no. 3 (2004): 416—27.

2 Malcolm Gladwell, Blink (New York: Back Bay Books, 2007).

3 Madeline E. Heilman and Michelle C. Haynes, “No Credit Where Credit Is Due: Attributional Rationalization of Women’s Success in Male-Female Teams,” Journal of Applied Psychology 90, no. 5 (2005): 905—16.

4 Madeline E. Heilman and Tyler G. Okimoto, “Why Are Women Penalized for Success at Male Tasks?”; and Madeline E. Heilman et al., “Penalties for Success.”

5 “Women on Boards. Factsheet 1: The Economic Arguments,” European Commission (2013), http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/womenonboards/factsheet-general-1_en.pdf; Nancy M. Carter and Harvey M. Wagner, “The Bottom Line: Corporate Performance and Women’s Representation on Boards (2004—2008),” Catalyst (March 1, 2011), http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/bottom-line-corporate- performance-and-womens-representation-boards-20042008; Mary Cur-tis, Christine Schmid, and Marion Struber, Gender Diversity and Corporate Performance (August 2012), Credit Suisse Research Institute, https://www.credit-suisse.com/newsletter/doc/gender_diversity.pdf; and Dow Jones, “Women at the Wheel: Do Female Executives Drive Start-Up Suc-cess?” (2012), http://www.dowjones.com/collateral/files/WomenPE_re-port_final.pdf.

6 Rhea E. Steinpreis, Katie A. Anders, and Dawn Ritzke, “The Impact of Gender on the Review of Curricula Vitae of Job Applicants and Tenure Candidates: A National Empirical Study,” Sex Roles 41, nos. 7—8 (1999): 509—28.

7 Catalyst, The Double-Bind Dilemma for Women in Leadership: Damned if You Do, Doomed if You Don’t (July 2007), http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/double-bind-dilemma-women-leadership-damned-if-you-do-doomed-if-you-dont-0; Madeline E. Heilman and Julie J. Chen, “Same Behavior, Different Consequences: Reactions to Men’s and Women’s Altruistic Citizenship Behaviors,” Journal of Applied Psychology 90, no. 3 (2005): 431—41; Madeline E. Heilman and Tyler G. Okimoto, “Why Are Women Penalized for Success at Male Tasks?”; and Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2013), 39—51.

8 Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In, 149; Deborah Tannen, “The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why,” Harvard Business Review 73, no. 5 (1995): 138—48; and Melissa C. Thomas-Hunt and Katherine Phillips, “When What You Know Is Not Enough,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 30, no. 12 (2004): 1585–98. For a review of gender and speech, see Cecilia L. Ridgeway and Lynn Smith-Lovin, “The Gender System and Interaction,” Annual Review of Sociology 25, no. 1 (1999): 202—3.

9 Cedric Herring, “Does Diversity Pay? Race, Gender and the Business Case for Diversity,” American Sociological Review 74, no. 2 (2009): 208—24.

10 Corinne A. Moss-Racusin et al., “Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, no. 41 (2012): 16474—79.

11 Madeline E. Heilman, “Gender Stereotypes and Workplace Bias,” Research in Organizational Behavior 32 (2012): 113—35; and Eric Luis Uhl-mann and Geoffrey L. Cohen, “Constructed Criteria: Redefining Merit to Justify Discrimination,” Psychological Science 16, no. 6 (2005): 474—80.

12 Rhea E. Steinpreis, Katie A. Anders, and Dawn Ritzke, “The Impact of Gender on the Review of Curricula Vitae of Job Applicants and Tenure Candidates.”

13 Ibid.; and Claudia Goldin and Cecilia Rouse, “Orchestrating Impartiali-ty: The Impact of ‘Blind’ Auditions on Female Musicians,” The American Economic Review 90, no. 4 (2000): 715—41.

14 Sylvia Beyer, “Gender Differences in Causal Attributions by College Students of Performance on Course Examinations,” Current Psychology 17, no. 4 (1998): 346—58; and Sylvia Beyer, “The Effects of Gender, Dysphoria, and Performance Feedback on the Accuracy of Self-Evalua-tions,” Sex Roles 47, nos. 9—10 (2002): 453—64.

15 Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In, 30; and Madeline E. Heilman and Michelle C. Haynes, “No Credit Where Credit Is Due.”

16 Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn, “The U.S. Gender Pay Gap in the 1990s: Slowing Convergence,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 60, no. 1 (2006): 45—66.

17 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Equal Pay—A Good Business Decision (December 2011), http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/up-loaded_files/publications/equalpayagoodbusinessdecision.pdf; Peggy A. Cloninger, Nagarajan Ramamoorthy, and Patrick C. Flood, “The Influence of Equity, Equality and Gender on Organizational Citizenship Behaviors,” S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal 76 (Autumn 2011): 37—46; and Kent Romanoff, Ken Boehm, and Edward Benson, “Pay Equity: Internal and External Considerations,” Compensation and Benefits Review 18a, no. 6 (1986): 17—25.

18 Christianne Corbett and Catherine Hill, Graduating to a Pay Gap: The Earnings of Women and Men One Year After College Graduation, American Association of University Women (October 2012), http://www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/graduating-to-a-pay-gap-the-earnings-of-wom-en-and-men-one-year-after-college-graduation.pdf.

19 Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In, 45; Emily T. Amanatullah and Catherine H. Tinsley, “Punishing Female Negotiators for Asserting Too Much . . . or Not Enough: Exploring Why Advocacy Moderates Backlash Against Assertive Female Negotiators,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 120, no. 1 (2013): 110—22; and Hannah Riley Bowles, Linda Babcock, and Lei Lai, “Social Incentives for Gender Differences in the Propensity to Initiate Negotiations: Sometimes It Does Hurt to Ask,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 103, no. 1 (2007): 84–103.

Endnotes

14

20 Andreas Leibbrandt and John A. List, Do Women Avoid Salary Nego-tiations? Evidence from a Large Scale Natural Field Experiment, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 18511 (November 2012).

21 Emily T. Amanatullah and Michael W. Morris, “Negotiating Gender Roles: Gender Differences in Assertive Negotiating Are Mediated by Women’s Fear of Backlash and Attenuated When Negotiating on Behalf of Others,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98, no. 2 (2010): 256—67; and Hannah Riley Bowles et al., “Constraints and Triggers: Situational Mechanics of Gender in Negotiation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89, no. 6 (2005): 951—65.

22 Fiona Greig, “Propensity to Negotiate and Career Advancement: Evidence from an Investment Bank That Women Are on a ‘Slow Elevator,’” Negotiation Journal no. 24 (2008): 495—508.

23 Hannah Riley Bowles and Linda Babcock, “How Can Women Escape the Compensation Negotiation Dilemma? Relational Accounts Are One Answer,” Psychology of Women Quarterly 37, no. 1 (2013): 80—96.

24 Joanna Barsh and Lareina Yee, Special Report: Unlocking the Full Potential of Women at Work, McKinsey & Company (2012), http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/womenreportnew.pdf.

25 Joan C. Williams and Rachel Dempsey, What Works for Women at Work: Four Patterns Working Women Need to Know (New York: NYU Press, 2014).

26 Madeline E. Heilman and Julie J. Chen, “Same Behavior, Different Consequences.”

27 Joanna Barsh and Lareina Yee, Special Report: Unlocking the Full Potential of Women at Work.

28 Jennifer L. Lawless and Richard L. Fox, Men Rule: The Continued Under-Representation of Women in U.S. Politics, Women & Politics Institute, American University School of Public Affairs (January 2012), http://www.american.edu/spa/wpi/upload/2012-Men-Rule-Report-final-web.pdf; Marianne Bertrand, “New Perspectives on Gender,” in Handbook of Labor Economics, vol. 4B, ed. Orley Ashenfelter and David Card (Amsterdam: North Holland, 2010): 1544—90; Rachel Croson and Uri Gneezy, “Gender Differences in Preferences,” Journal of Economic Literature 47, no. 2 (2009): 448—74; Irene E. De Pater et al., “Challenging Experiences: Gender Differences in Task Choice,” Journal of Manage-rial Psychology 24, no.1 (2009): 4—28; Catherine C. Eckel and Phillip J. Grossman, “Men, Women, and Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence,” in Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, vol. 1, ed. Charles R. Plott and Vernon L. Smith (Amsterdam: North Holland, 2008), 1061—73; S. Scott Lind et al., “Competency-Based Student Self-Assessment on a Surgery Rotation,” Journal of Surgical Research 105, no. 1 (2002): 31—34; and Kimberly A. Daubman, Laurie Heatherington, and Alicia Ahn, “Gen-der and the Self-Presentation of Academic Achievement,” Sex Roles 27, nos. 3–4 (1992): 187–204.

29 Anne Ross-Smith and Colleen Chesterman, “‘Girl Disease’: Women Managers’ Reticence and Ambivalence Towards Organizational Advance-ment,” Journal of Management & Organization 15, no. 5 (2009): 582—95;

Liz Doherty and Simonetta Manfredi, “Women’s Progression to Senior Positions in English Universities,” Employee Relations 28, no. 6 (2006): 553—72; and Belinda Probert, “‘I Just Couldn’t Fit It In’: Gender and Unequal Outcomes in Academic Careers,” Gender, Work and Organization 12, no. 1 (2005): 50—72.

30 Georges Desvaux, Sandrine Devillard-Hoellinger, and Mary C. Meaney, “A Business Case for Women,” The McKinsey Quarterly (September 2008): 4, http://www.womenscolleges.org/files/pdfs/BusinessCasefor-Women.pdf.

31 Pauline Rose Clance and Suzanne Ament Imes, “The Imposter Phenom-enon in High Achieving Women: Dynamics and Therapeutic Intervention,” Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice 15, no. 3 (1978): 241—47; and Gina Gibson-Beverly and Jonathan P. Schwartz, “Attachment, Entitlement, and the Impostor Phenomenon in Female Graduate Students,” Journal of College Counseling 11, no. 2 (2008): 120—21.

32 Sylvia Ann Hewlett and Carolyn Buck Luce, “Off-Ramps and On-Ramps: Keeping Talented Women on the Road to Success,” Harvard Business Review 83, no. 3 (2005): 43—54.

33 Ibid.

34 Ibid.

35 Joseph Yaffe, “Rethinking Workplace Pregnancy Discussions,” LeanIn.Org, April 8, 2013, http://leanin.org/discussions/rethinking-work-place-pregnancy-discussions/.

36 Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In, 8; Kimberly E. O’Brien et al., “A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Gender Differences in Mentoring,” Journal of Manage-ment 36, no. 2 (2010): 539—40; Herminia Ibarra, Nancy M. Carter, and Christine Silva, “Why Men Still Get More Promotions than Women,” Har-vard Business Review 88, no. 9 (2010): 80—85; and George F. Dreher and Taylor H. Cox Jr., “Race, Gender, and Opportunity: A Study of Compensa-tion Attainment and the Establishing of Mentoring Relationships,” Journal of Applied Psychology 81, no. 3 (1996): 297—308.

37 Tammy D. Allen, Mark L. Poteet, and Susan M. Burroughs, “The Mentor’s Perspective: A Qualitative Inquiry and Future Research Agenda,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 51, no. 1 (1997): 86.

38 Herminia Ibarra, Nancy M. Carter, and Christine Silva, “Why Men Still Get More Promotions Than Women.”

39 Sylvia Ann Hewlett et al., The Sponsor Effect: Breaking Through the Last Glass Ceiling, a Harvard Business Review Research Report (December 2010): 35.

40 Ibid.

41 Patrick R. Laughlin, Erin C. Hatch, Jonathan S. Silver, and Lee Boh, “Groups Perform Better Than the Best Individuals on Letters-to-Numbers Problems: Effects of Induced Strategies,” Journal of Personality and So-cial Psychology 90, no. 4 (2006): 644—51; and Paul Zarnoth and Janet A. Sniezek, “The Social Influence of Confidence in Group Decision Making,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 33, no. 4 (1997): 345—66.

Endnotes

15