Task 1:
Share a summary of your Analysis Assignment(please find attached Doc-Networking Questions and Networking diagram ) as well as THREE takeaways from the readings/videos (try for a minimum 200 words)(Please find attached readings/Videos). Complete your original post by Friday.
Video link: https://www.ted.com/talks/worklife_with_adam_grant_networking_for_people_who_hate_networking?referrer=playlist-worklife_with_adam_grant_mar_2019
Task 2:
Then leave TWO replies on your classmates’ posts (100 word minimum).Please see below 2 classmate posts and give two replies accordingly.
Post 1:
Hi All,
I am pleasantly surprised how these articles we read this week are so right on for the unfortunate times we live in. They are easy to read and easily understandable for any reader. I have lot of takeaways, but i am going to emphasize on three, First one is Similarity-Attraction Paradigm explained so well by Dr. Forret. I felt this all the time that people with similar race, gender or ethnicity work comfortably and succeed in their work because of trusting each other and learning from each other. For example, in one of my MBA class when i entered the room i saw tables each with 4 chairs. I went and sat at one of the tables and 10mins into to the class I turned around and I was shocked how people coming in one by one picked their team. All the people with similar race sat together including my table. My second takeaway is from the PowerPoint presentation by Dr. Forret mentioning that networking is about giving either in terms of money, time, your effort/energy into helping someone. I tell my kids this all the time. Always do good and expect nothing. If someone reciprocates (also explained by Dr. Forret in her PowerPoint and the article Guide to successfully Navigate Career Changes) then it is good. My third takeaway is how Dr. Forret & Dr. Sullivan explained the three shifts (Emphasis on Intrinsic rewards, self-reliance, professional loyalty). How true is all that, is my feeling when I was reading this article.
Thank you,
Dhatri Alla
Post 2:
My analysis discussed the results of the two different networking diagnostic tests. I found that I need to try and grow my network at all levels, especially in my profession. I am an accountant currently and have a limited background in supply chain management. Perhaps joining an organization that is in this field would be beneficial. My first takeaway is having a broad social network is important for forming connections and being able to achieve different goals both in your career and out. These social networks are arguably just as important as human capital and technical skills. A second takeaway is I realized how difficult it can be for different minority groups to form connections and network, especially with powerful people who have clout to help them. There are numerous reasons for this, one reason is people like to interact with people who are similar to them (i.e.: gender, race, ethnicity). A third takeaway was from the grant video recording. He did a good job of explaining how to get past the negative aspect of networking and how to network properly. Networking properly can be done by asking for advice rather than by wanting something more burdensome. It also was clear that being able to help the person you are contacting is beneficial, so you are not just trying to take and use the other person.
Thank You,
Hadden
Impact of Social Networks on
the Advancement of Women
and RaciallEthnic Minority Groups
Monica L. Forret
here have been glimmers of progress in U.S. corporations for women and
bers of racial and ethnic minority groups. In 2002, Fortune published its
ist of the 50 Most Powerful Black Executives in ~mer i ca . ‘ The Executive
eadership Council, a professional network for senior African American ex-
utives in Fortune 500 firms, has grown from I9 members in 1956 t o over 340
embers today, with women making up one-third of the membership. Although
e signs of upward movement are becoming more visible, the pace is slow. For
stance, although women account for about half of all managerial a n d profes-
onal positions, they hold only 8 percent of executive vice president positions
d higher at Fortune 500 companies, and only 5 percent are among the top five
ghest paid for each company.*
A number of explanations exist for the lack of upward advancement for
omen and minorities. A Catalyst study found that both Fortune 1000 CEOs
d women executives agreed that lack of line experience was a major factor
eventing women’s upward movement. Other major barriers cited include ex-
usion from informal networks, negative stereotypes about women, lack of ac-
ountability of top leaders for advancing women, lack of role models, lack of
entoring, and lack of awareness of organizational politics.3 Constraints posed
social networks can help explain the obstacles women and minorities face that
ult in their restricted upward movement in organizations. The constraints
me in a variety of forms, such as increased difficulty in forming social networks
and lower levels of influence held by the members of their social networks.
onsistent with Ragins’s definition, the term nlinority will be used here to refer
those groups traditionally lacking power in organizations-including women
d members of racial and ethnic groups.4
In this chapter, I will first discuss the need for more attention to the social
pita1 of minorities and important factors to consider in building social net-
rks. Second, I explore three major barriers minorities face in developing their
1 52 Orgariizational Practices and Indiv idual Strategies
control the flow of information between them, which may be used to one’s
advantage.22 In addition to Burt, Podolny and Baron found that structural holes
were associated with upward mobility, and Rodan and Galunic showed that
they were related to greater managerial pe r fo rmar~ce .~~
F i r ~ a l l ~ , the resources of a tie refer to the benefits that may be derived from
a relationship. These benefits may take a wide variety of forks, including in-
formation, friendship, materialslservices, and i n f l u e n ~ e . ‘ ~ In particular, re-
lationships with high-status individuals have the potential to provide valued
outcomes. To illustrate, in their study of job seekers, Lin, Ensel, and Vaughn
found that the status of the contact had a strong positive effect on the prestige of
the attained job, indicating the ability of powerful contacts to exert influence on
one’s behalf.25
T o summarize, network size, tie strength, pattern of ties, and resources of
ties are critical factors to consider in building one’s social network. However,
mino~ities experience unique barriers in their attempts to develop their social
networks, which will now be considered.
BARRIERS MINORITIES FACE IN BUILDING
THEIR SOCIAL NETWORKS
Three explanations for the difficulties minorities experience in building
their social networks are centered on: ( 1 ) the similarity-attraction paradigm,
(2) tokenism theory, and (3) existing organizational structures.
Similarity-Attraction Paradigm
Using Byrne’s similarity-attraction paradigm, those who are considered si-
milar on ascriptive characteristics (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity) are likely to
perceive greater interpersonal similarities, which in turn leads to increased attrac-
t ~ o n and more frequent c o i ~ ~ m u n i c a t i o n . ~ ~ Gender, racial, and ethnic sin~ila-
rities facilitate interactions with others like oneself. Similarity on these factors
increases the likelihood ofshared values, beliefs, and attitudes, which helps reduce
uncertainty and create trusting relationships. For example, Tsui and O’Reilly
found that subordinates in same-gender superior-subordinate dyads were rated
higher in perceived effectiveness and lilting by their superiors and experienced
lower role conflict and ambiguity than subordinates in mixed-gender dyadsz7
According to March and Simon, similarity on ascribed characteristics
influences t l ~ e “language compatibility” between two people and makes com-
munication easier.28 Roberts and O’Reilly found that participants in a coin-
~nunication network tend to have higher job satisfaction, more organizational
commitment, and higher job performance than isolate^.’^ Furthermore, by
communicating frequently, individuals develop similar attitudes and beliefs,
which facilitate their integration into the o r g a n i ~ a t i o n . ~ ~
Impact of Social Networks on Women and Minor i ty Groups 153
Mou~ever, the similarity-attraction paradigm poses a problem for minorities
in organizations in that the demographic makeup offers fewer opportunities for
interactioi~s with others like themselves based on gender, race, or et l~nici ty.~ ‘
For example, based on a sample of managers from four Fortune 500 companies,
Ibarra found that minorities had fewer same-race ties and fewer strong ties than
white This lack of similarity affects the availability of social support
for minority employees. Furthermore, given that minorities have less power in
organizations, ties to other minorities are less instrumental in their ability to
provide access to valued resources. Therefore, minorities have to seek out dis-
. similar others to obtain what they need. This necessity was illustrated in Ibarra’s
study of an advertising firm, in which men developed both instrumental and
expressive (i.e., fi-iendship) contacts with other males, whereas females devel-
oped instrumental contacts with men and expressive contacts with women.
3 3
Tokenism Theory
According to Kanter, the presence of a small, easily identifiable minority
group of individuals (referred to as tokens) results in increased performance
pressures and boundary heightening. Given that minorities are highly visible in
: organizations, they face added pressures to perform. If a niinority employee
performs poorly, it is more liltely to be known throughout the organization. This
may encourage ~n,ajority employees to distance tliemselves from minorities to
avoid negative perceptions that association might convey. Furthermore, the
: behavior of a minority employee is likely to be construed as being symbolic for
1 ‘ the group. For example, if a woman fails at her position, majority members are
‘ likely to view this as evidence that women as a group are unable to handle those
types of jobs.34
Bouildary heightening occurs due to polarization that magnifies distinc-
tions betweell minority and majority groups. Boundary heightening results in an
‘ increase in stereotyping and isolation of minorities from areas where informal
socializing and politicking take place.35 To illustrate, Ely found that sex-role
stereotypes were exaggerated in law firms dominated by men, in contrast to
: firms with a more balanced gender r e ~ r e s e n t a t i o n . ~ ~ Furthermore, Lyness and
Thompson found that female executives were more likely than male executives
to report lack of culture fit and bein excluded from informal networks as
barriers to their career advancement.”These results support the research on
; organizatioilal interaction networks in that minorities, due to their token status,
have less access to members of the dominant power structures. 3 8
According to Baron and Pfeffer, white males are motivated to prescrve the
ingroupioutgroup distinctions to protect their status and privilege in organizations.
39
‘
Applying tokenism theory to the building of social networks, one c a n surmise
that there will be a tendency for white males to avoid developing relationships
with minority employees, resulting in smaller social networks comprised of less
instru~nental contacts.
154 Organizational Practices and Individual Strategies Impact of Social Networks on Women and Minority Groups 155
Existing Organizational Structures
An individual’s position in the organizational structure influences that
person’s social n e t w ~ r l i . ~ ~ T l ~ e hierarchy ofauthority indicated by an organization
chart determines the superior and subordinates one interacts with to facilitate
vertical coordination. Furthermore, the design and flow of the work necessitates
coordination with other individuals, and changes in the technology used have
been found to affect communication patterns.41 T o the extent that the job held
calls for coordination with individuals from a variety of work units, there is more
opportunity to develop personal relationships, which may influence network
size, the strength of ties, the pattern of ties, and the resources available.
Brass and colleagues also argue that the location of a person in the physical
and temporal space of an organization influences interaction patterns.42 We
tend to communicate with individuals who are in close proximity to us and
who work the same hours we do. One drawback of telecommuting and other
types of flexible work arrangements (which are frequently marketed to women)
is the negative impact on informal learning and relationship development
due to the lower rates of interaction with members of the ~rganization.’~
Similarly, Meyerson and Fletcher emphasize the importance of time bound-
aries in organizations. If strategic clecisions are frequently made outside of
normal working hours (e.g., while socializing afier work), women are less likely
to have input into them due to the need to attend to child care and other
responsibilities at 11orne.~~
Also, as individuals move into different positions in an organization, their
social networks change. New relationships must be developed to meet the
demands required by the new position, and former relationships may erode
through n o n u ~ e . ‘ ~ Starting a new position poses an extra challenge for mino-
rities in that they are more likely to have to develop relationships with others
who are dissimilar on the basis of gender, race, or ethnic status. Therefore,
organizational decision makers may believe that promoting a minority will
result in a slower transition and reduced levels of effectiveness.
Furthermore, Pfeffer states that examining the job structure to ensure that
minorities are located in jobs that lead to higher positions in the organization is
c r ~ c i a l . ‘ ~ Because lack of line experience is a major factor preventing upward
movement, it is important for minorities to obtain jobs that have career lad-
d e r ~ . ‘ ~ Although minorities may hold staff positions that call for extensive
interaction with others, those holding line positions with profit and loss re-
sponsibility have access to the most powerful decision makers and opportunities
to prove their value to the organization. Competition for such line positions is
intense and political. Having a powerful sponsor in the upper levels of an
organization advocating on one’s behalf provides a strong advantage to ob-
taining these jobs. Minorities are much less likely to have such sponsors.
In sum, research shows that multiple forces help maintain existing power
structures. What is being done to address this situation? Next, I discuss the
success of three strategies women and minorities are using to alter their social
networks and improve their opportunities in organizations, namely, rnentoring,
networking, and network groups.
Mentoring has been defined as a relationship whereby a more senior, ex-
perienced individual is committed to providing developmental assistance and
guidance to a less experienced prot~gC.48 Obtaining a powerful mentor re-
presents the addition of a strong tie to an individual’s social network that pro-
vides access to valued resources.49 Mentors provide protCgCs with career de-
velopment and psychosocial They nominate prottgCs for challenging
and visible assignments and provide coaching to help ensure that their protCgCs
succeed. By introducing protCgCs to influential individuals, mentors confer a
sense of legitimacy on their protCg~s.51 Mentors serve as role models for pro-
tCgCs and affirm their worthiness and identity by offering counseling and
friendship. The benefits of mentoring for protCgCs as a result of such assistance
have been well established. ProtCgCs have greater opportunities a n d higher
compensation and receive more promotions than those who have not received
m e n t ~ r i n ~ . ‘ ~ ProtCgCs also are more satisfied with their jobs and careers and
have greater intentions to remain in their organizations. 5 3
Many researchers have discussed barriers that women and minorities face
in finding potential mentors.54 Given that the upper echelons of organizations
are dominated by white males, there is a lack of role models available to serve as
mentors. The few women and minorities in the upper ranks may feel over-
whelmed by the number of individuals who might desire a mentoring re-
lationship, and cross-race and cross-gender relationships are more difficult to
develop. Cross-gender and cross-race rnentoring relationships are highly visible,
which might invoke feelings of envy and accusations of favoritism by peers,
especially if the protCgC is perceived as less competent.55 In addition, the high
visibility of the relationship makes it more likely that a failure by t h e protCgC
will be known in the organization and may reflect poorly on t h e mentor.
Furthermore, men and women may avoid participating in a cross-gender men-
toring relationship due to concerns that a sexual relationship might develop or
to avoid damaging gossip and rumors that a sexual relationship exists.56
However, even though these barriers are present, several studies show no
differences between men and women in the number of mentoring relationships
or the amount of mentoring receiveds7 According to Thomas, d u e to the
scarcity of demographically similar relationships in an organization, minorities
are more likely to search outside their organization to find individuals willing to
provide developmental a s s i ~ t a n c e . ~ ~ Although benefits such as career advice and
acceptance can be gained from these relationships, a mentor outside one’s
organization is unlikely to wield the type of power and influence needed to help
156 Organizational Practices and Individual Strategies Impact of Social Networks on Women and Minority Groups 157
the protege land prestigious assignments and move up the career ladder in his or relationships is associated ~ l i t h greater work satisfaction, career progress, and
her organization. 59 retention in the organization.”
Some evidence suggests that cross-gender or cross-race relationships yield Individuals engage in networking to help build developmental relationships
fewer benefits than those accruing to white male prot6gb with white male that in turn improve tlieir social networks by influencing the size of their
mentors. Although Dreher and Cox identified no gender or racial differences in networks, their pattern of ties, and the resources available through their ties.
forming mentoring relationships, they found preferences for similarity. African Nehvorlting behaviors are proactive atteinpts by individuals to develop and
American, Hispanic, and female MBAs were less likely to establish mentoring maintain relationships with others for the purpose of mutual benefit in their
relationships with white male mentors, despite a compensation advantage for work or career.71 Networking expands an individual’s relationship constella-
those with white male mentors.60 In his examination of cross-race mentoring tion by forming relationships with those internal to the organization (e.g., peers)
relationships, Thomas found that protCgCs receive inore psychosocial support and those external to it (e.g., members of professional association^).^^ The rela-
from mentors of the same Furthermore, some research suggests that role tionships formed through networlting tend to be characterized I,y less interaction
modeling is more liltely to occur in same-gender inentoring ‘The and intimacy than informal mentoring relationships, and hence are considered
increased psychosocial functions protCgCs receive in same-gender, same-race to be wealter ties.73
relationships are not surprising given the greater social identification based on Forret and Sullivan advocate taking a strategic approach to networking, in
sex and race.63 that individuals should determine their career goals; assess their current social
Given the widespread benefits of mentoring and the additional barriers capital; align their networking efforts accordingly to reach individuals in their
women and minorities face in developing a mentoring relationship, organiza- organization, profession, or community; and invest the time, energy, and effort
tions have implemented formal mentorin programs to ensure that mentoring to develop mutually beneficial r e l a t i o n s ~ ~ i ~ ~ s . ~ ~ Developing interpersonal rela-
relationships are accessible to employees.’ However, several studies show that ps through networking is considered to be a specific competency vital for
ing one’s career. 7 5
formal mentoring programs tend to be ineffective for advancing a protCgC’s
career.6s Noe argues that one should not expect the same benefits from both et~iorking is related to career outcomes of managers, such as promotions
formal and informal mentoring relationships because the latter develop natu- salary progression.76 Forret and Dougherty identified five types of network-
rally based on mutual attraction and interest.66 111 contrast, formal mentoring behaviors: maintaining external contacts, socializing, engaging in profes-
programs tend to be for a l i~ni ted time period (such as a ear) in wliich inelltors sional activities, participating in community, and increasing internal ~ i s i b i l i t y . ~ ~
and proteges are paired through a matching process that may not be Imed n a study examining the relationship between types of networking behaviors
on mutual identification given the shortage of mentors in organizations.h7 For nd career outcornes for men and wornen, Forret and Dougherty found in-
strong sponsorship to occur, the mentoring relationship needs to be char- creasing internal visibility to be significantly related to nuinl~er of promotions
acterized by identification and trust between the mentor and protCgC, co nd total con~pensation for men, but not for women. Also, a marginal re-
fidence in the mentor of the protCge1s abilities and potential, and a coinmitine tionshill between engaging in professional activities and total cornpensatioi~
to helping the prot6gC succeed. Although formal inentoring programs m as found. However, the relationship was positive for men and negative for
provide seine benefits to minorities, it is unlikely that they will receive th omen.7B Although women make attempts to increase their internal visibility,
backing an illformal mentor can provide. e work assigiiments and taskforces in which they participate may be less
estigious than those of men, given their lack of access to rnembers of the or-
anization’s power structui-e.79 Wit11 regard to engaging in professional activ-
NETWORKING S, organizations may assign a higher value to the professional involvement of
en than of women.*”
In light of the difficulties in finding a high-ranlting senior manager to take a The few studies examining gender differences in networking behaviors
strong interest in one’s development, and given the current boundaryless work OW little difference between men and women. In the Gould and Penley study,
environment characterized by frequent movement within and across organiza- en reported engaging in networking (measured via the extent to which
tions, a new focus has emerged on forming multiple developmeiltal relati spondents reported building a network of contacts and friendships in the
ganization) more than women, but the result was marginally significant. 61
ships to support one’s career.68 Multiple developmental relationships build
IZram’s concept of the relationship constellation, which proposes that career an milarly, F’orret and Dougherty found few differences. Men were m o r e likely
psychosocial support can come from a multitude of people both within and o o engage in socializing behaviors than women; however, a subsequent analy-
side the organization.69 Research has shown that having multiple developlnen is comparing men with single women found no difference in socializing
158 Organizational Practices and Individual Strategies Impact of Social Networks on Women and Minority Groups 159
b e l ~ a v i o r s . ~ ~ Because married women tend to carry a disproportionate share of respondents with network groups in their organization reported more support
family and household responsibilities, it is not surprising that little tinie is left and ties wit11 other African Americans, were more likely to receive support from
for socializing with colleagues outside of work.83 a mentor, and felt they were better able to interact with white mentor^.^’ The
Although writings on protean careers stress the importance of networking, presence of a network group was positively related to optimism about career
especially because the burden of responsibility for one’s career has shifted froin rogress in the organization, although this relationship was mediated by the
the organization to the individual, research on the benefits of networking for the resence of a mentor. Network groups also may influence job performance.
careers of women and minorities is ~ a c l t i n ~ . ~ ‘ T h e little existing evidence shows cording to Catalyst, sales for women brokers who started a network group at
women benefit less than men from networking efforts. One explanation may be ain Rauscher increased 19.2 percent compared with 5 percent for the rest of
that because women’s contacts are more likely to be at lower levels in organi-
zations, they have less ability to provide influence and access to resources There is some concern that forming a network group will promote backlash
Studies examining the success of networking behaviors of minorities need to be y the majority members in an organization. As Friedman discussed, a vo-
conducted. luntarily formed group of minorities signals that social identity makes a differ-
nce. Majority group members may see a network group as a threat to the
existing power structure, and its existence may result in heightened tension and
NETWORK GROUPS voidance behaviors. Those who might benefit from participation in a network
oup may choose to decline membership over fears that it will highlight their
Network groups are defined as intraorganizational groups composed of cia1 identity and negatively influence their career progress.93 In a Catalyst
members who share a common social identity (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity) who rvey of management representatives and leaders of the women’s network at
have formally organized themselves to ~ rov ide support for their members.85 32 companies, close to 75 percent of both groups indicated the presence of
African American employees at Xerox organized one of the first network grou me minor negative reactions to the network group, such as males feeling
After an African American colleague left the company in 1971, a group of ened, concerns over elitism, women’s fears about how participation might
rican American employees started meeting to practice their presentatio their careers, conflicts between the group’s and HR management’s role,
share sales techniques, and provide tips for navigating the corporate culture to ack of management support for the network group. However, 20 percent
help each other succeed.86 pressed no negative responses, and only a very few experienced significant
According to Catalyst, 33 percent of Fortune 100 companies have w ckla~h.~ ‘ In Creating Women’s Networks, Catalyst outlines steps for creating without women’s networks.87 Network groups provide networking opportuniti verall, although network groups can provide a variety of benefits to their Network groups meet regularly, often on company premises, where the The results of proactive attempts such as mentoring, networking, and Organizational Practices a n d Individual Strategies Impact of Social Networks on Women a n d Minority Groups
substantive interaction take place between the organization’s ininority and 2. Betsy Morris, Kate Bonamici, Susan M. IZaufinan, and Patricia Neering, AS Laurence Prusak and D o n Cohen discuss in their book, In Good 3. Sheila Wellington, Marcia Brumit Kropf, and Paulette R. Gerkovich, “What’s one another that accon~plishes organizational objective^.^^ Sponsoring the oc- ower Perspective,” Academy of Malzagenzerzt Review 22 (1997): 482-52 1.
casional social gathering to provide opportunities for majority and minori 5. Gary S. Becker, Hunzalz Capital (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975); lationships that are crucial for successful organizational functioning. In 6. Ann M. Morrison and Mary Ann Von Glinow, “Womeri and Minorities in Collaborative relationships need to be developed between majority and 8. Jeanne M. Brett and Linda K. Stroll, “Jumping Ship: Who Benefits from an problem solving, and trust.97 Building social networks composed of individuals Compensation: The Moderating Effects of Race and Gender,” Academy of Manogell~eizt
diverse in gender, race, and ethnic backgrouild increases the likelihood of oumal43 (2000): 890-900. 93 Ratings of Promotion Potential,” \ounzal of Organizational Behavior 16 (1995): 391-400. 11. Phyllis Tharenou, Shane Latimer, and Denise Conroy, “How Do You Make It mental structural changes to eradicate sources of inequity. By questioning or- ncement,” Academy of Management \ouinal 37 (1994): 899-931; Joy A. Schneer and agers based o n achieving diversity goals, Georgia-Pacific increased its percen- Concept,” Acade~izy of Maizagemeizt Review 27 (2002): 17-40.
tage of top women executives from 9 percent in 2001 to 29 percent in 2 0 0 4 . ‘ ~ ~ 14. Scott E. Seibert, Maria L. Kraimer, and Robert C. Lideri, “A social Capital 15. Monica L. Forret and Sherry E. Sullivan, “A Balanced Scorecard ~ p ~ r o a c h to ciology 78 (1973): 1360-80. NOTES bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974). Sharing Knowledge across Organizational Subunits,” Adnzi~zistrative Scierzce Quarterly (July 22, 2002): 60-80. 162 Organizational Practices a n d Individual Strategies
21. Marc-David L. Seidel, Jeffrey T . Polzer, and Katherine J. Stewa~t, “Friends in 22. Ronald S. Burt, Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Coinpetition (Cam- 23. Ibid.; Podolny and Baron, “Resources and Relationships”; Siinon Rodan and 24. Noel M. Tichy, Michael L. Tushman, and Charles Fombrun, “Social Net- 25. Nan Lin, Walter M. Ensel, and John C . Vaughn, “Social Resources and 26. Donn E. Byrne, The Attraction Paradigm (New York: Academic Press, 1971); 27. Anne S. Tsui and Charles A. O’Reilly 111, “Beyond Simple De~nographic 28. James G . March and Herbert A. Simon, Orgaizizations (New York: Wiley, 29. See Roberts and OIReilly, “Some Correlations.” Demography and Turnover in Top-Management Groups,” Admiizistrative Scieizce Quar- 31. Her~ninia Ibarra, “Personal Nehvorks of Woinen and Minorities in Man- 32. I-Ierminia Ibarra, “Race, Opportunity, and Diversity of Social Circles in 33. Herminia Ibarra, “Homophily and Differential Returns: Sex Differences in 34. Rosabeth Moss Kanter, “Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life: Skewed 35. Ibid. Gender Identity at Work,” Acaden~y of Management ]ou7izal 38 (1995): 589-634. Comparison of Matched Samples of Female and Male Executives,” ]ounlal of Applied 38. Daniel J. Brass, “Men’s and Women’s Networlts: A Study of Interaction Pat- Impact of Social Networlts on Women and Minority Groups 163
39. Jaines N. Baron and Jeffrey Pfeffer, “The Social Psychology o f Organizations 40. Daniel J. Brass, “A Social Network Perspective on Human Resources Man- 41. Marlene E. Burkhardt and Daniel J. Brass, “Chaiiging Patterns or Patterns of 42. See Brass, “A Social Network”; see Brass et al., “Taking Stock.” Isolation, and Employee Develop~llent in Public and Private Organizations,” Jounlal of 44. Debra E. Meyerson and Joyce I<. Fletcher, "A Modest Manifesto for Shat-
tering the Glass Ceiling," Hanxard Business Review (JanuaryFebruary 2000): 126-36.
45. Podolny and Baron, “Resources and Relationships.” Environments,” in Michael B. Arthur, Douglas T . Hall, and Barbara S. Lawrence, eds., 47. Welliilgto~l et al., “What’s Holding Women Back?” zational Life (Glenview, IL: Scott Foresinan, 1985). Development,” in Lynda L. Moore, ed., Not as Far as You Think: The Realities of Working 50. Kram, Mentoring at Work. ‘ Huinail Relatioi~s 42 (1989): 1-22. ences of ProtCgCs versus Non-ProttgCs,” ]ounzal of Organizational Behavior 10 (1989): 53. Monica C. Higgins and David A. Thomas, “Constellations a n d Careers: TO- 54. Kram, Mentoi-iizg at Work; Ragins, “Barriers to Mentoring”; Belle Rose Ragins 164 Organizational Practices and Individual Strategies
to Gaining a Mentor,” Acadeiny of Maizagement Journal 34 (1991): 939-51; Raymond A. 55. See Ragins, “Diversified Mentoring Relationships”; IZram, Mentoring a t Work. among Men and Women in Managerial, Professional, and Technical Positions,” \ounzal 58. David A. Thomas, “The Impact of Race on Managers’ Experiences of De- 59. Ragins, “Diversified Mentoring Relationships.” Study of Compensation Attainment and the Establishment of Mentoring Relationships,” 61. Thomas. “The Impact of Race on Managers’ Experiences.” Cross-Gender Mentoring Relationships,” Jounzal of Vocatio~lal Behavior 37 (1990): 321- 63. Ragins, “Diversified Mentoring Relationsliips.” Facing Organizations When Implemer~ting Formal Mentoring Progranlmes,” Leadership 65. Georgia T. Chao, Pat M. Walz, and Philip D. Gardner, “Formal and Inforinal 66. See Noe, “Women and Mentoring.” New Employment Principle for a New Orgal1iratio11al Era (New York: Oxford University 69. Kram, Me~ztoring a t Work.
Impact of Social Networks on Women and Minority Groups 165
70. See Higgins, “The More, T h e Merrier”; see Higgins and Thomas, “Con- 71. Monica L. Forret and Thomas W. Dougherty, “Correlates of Networking 72. See Higgins and Kram, “Reconceptualizing Mentoring.” Con~petency-Based Perspective,” Journal of Orga~zizational Belzavior 15 (1994): 307-24; 76. Monica L. Forret and Thomas W. Dougherty, “Networking Behaviors and 77. Forret and Dougherty, “Correlates of Networking Behavior.” A Longitudinal Perspective,” Psychological Bulleti11 105 (1989): 51-88; Brass, “Men’s 80. See Forret and Dougherty, “Networking Behaviors.” Approach to Careers (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996). Network Groups: Can Separation Enhance Integration?,” in Gerald R. Ferris, ed., Re- ‘ Black Managers,” Huilza7z Relatio7zs 5 1 (1998): 11 55-77. Week (November 29, 1993): 77. Compalzies (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999). z n Pel :. A 3rn:
: she late OU :
:ed nk, acti 166 Organizational Practices and Individual Strategies
93. See Friedman, “Defining the Scope.” Mnkes Organiratio~ls Wor-k (Boslu~~: Harvard Business School Press, 2001). “I 98. Baker, Acllieviizg Success through Social Crlpital. 100. Diane Brady, “The Glass Ceiling’s Iron Girdcrs,” Business Week Oillirle 101. Patricia Sellers, “By the Numbers,” Foitulze (February 2, 2004): 22.
Women Are on tlze Same Team. . . and Gail Evans
1 a m forced to begin this chapter with an admonition. Did you know that men fill Ten minutes later, a sinart young man lower in rank than the woman but I
heard you. You need to speak more powerfully and own your idea, rather than So I begin by getting angry at all of you and saying, “You don’t have tu be [removed]
Networking Quiz
Do you engage in the following behaviors? Place a √ in the box if you routinely engage in the activity.
Networking In Your Organization
· Accept new work assignments?
· Volunteer for committee assignments?
· Attend social functions of your organization?
· Participate in organization-sponsored athletic activities?
· Ask your boss about his or her priorities?
· Ask your direct reports how you can facilitate their development?
· Meet informally (e.g., over coffee) with your peers in the organization?
· Check with your internal and external clients to assess their needs?
· Send thank you notes or gifts to those who have helped you?
Networking In Your Profession
· Attend meetings/conferences of your professional organizations?
· Volunteer to serve on committees of your professional association?
· Collaborate on special projects with peers in your profession?
· Assist professional colleagues who ask for your help?
· Visit your peers from other organizations in their workplaces?
· Socialize with peers in your profession?
· Accept speaking engagements or deliver workshops?
· Publish articles in trade publications?
· Send cards, newspaper clippings, e-mail, etc. to keep in touch with associates?
Networking In Your Community
· Volunteer for community groups (e.g., United Way, Habitat for Humanity)?
· Meet members in your religious organization?
· Attend meetings of service groups such as Rotary, Kiwanis, or Chambers of Commerce?
· Attend or otherwise become involved in the arts, theater, symphony, or other quality of life events?
· Offer your special talents or expertise without requiring remuneration?
· Become active in city governance through participation on boards, councils, and committees?
· Become involved in promoting a personal cause, e.g., increasing literacy, preventing breast cancer, helping the elderly?
· Attend and participate in community-sponsored events?
· Meet others in your community who share your interest in a hobby or athletic activity?
How Much are You Networking? Total Number of Where Are You Focusing Your Networking Efforts? Indicate the number of Profession = ____, Community = ____ Where Should You Be Focusing Your Networking Efforts? _____________________
Quiz adapted from Forret, M. L., & Sullivan, S. E. (2002). A Balanced Scorecard Approach to Networking: A Guide to Successfully Navigating Career Changes. ©2011 Monica L. Forret
Network Diagram Exercise 1. Write your name in the center circle.
2. What is one career goal you have set for yourself? 3. In the circles provided, write the names of groups and/or significant individuals to whom
you are directly connected (e.g., professional association) that could help you achieve
that goal. Add additional circles if needed.
4. Draw lines connecting the circles if members of each circle know one another.
Based on your network diagram:
1. Are there additional groups or significant individuals who should be in your network?
_________________________________________________________________
2. Do most of the people in your circles know one another, or do you have plenty of
opportunities to receive unique information?
3. How diverse are the members of your circles in terms of factors such as gender, age, race,
expertise, and occupation? ©2011 Monica L. Forret
Network Diagram Exercise 1. Write your name in the center circle.
2. What is one career goal you have set for yourself? 3. In the circles provided, write the names of groups and/or significant individuals to whom
you are directly connected (e.g., professional association) that could help you achieve
that goal. Add additional circles if needed.
4. Draw lines connecting the circles if members of each circle know one another.
Based on your network diagram:
1. Are there additional groups or significant individuals who should be in your network?
_________________________________________________________________
2. Do most of the people in your circles know one another, or do you have plenty of
opportunities to receive unique information?
3. How diverse are the members of your circles in terms of factors such as gender, age, race,
expertise, and occupation? Turnitin Report Formatting Title Page Citation Outline
networks, including IBM, Procter & Gamble, Ford, Merclt, I
social support, and career development for their members. They also adv mbers, their ability to advance minorities to upper organizational levels may
senior management and human resource managers on issues that concern th limited due to the lack of interaction with members of the majority group.
members and attempt to create positive organizational change.” In a survey o search is needed to examine the linkages between network groups and ad-
20 I-IR managers, 70 Executive Leadership Council members, and 397 Na- ncement of minorities.
tional Black MBA Association members, similar findings regarding the effec-
tiveness of networlt groups were found. Networks groups were consistent1
rated as most effective at ~ r o v i d i n ~ social support, informal advice, support fo GGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING SOCIAL NETWORKS
younger employees, and voicing concerns to management. 89
hold a variety of events (e.g., speakers, seminars, workshops, career developme groups that minorities use to alter their networks have been somewhat
sessions) for their meinbers. Network groups are a means by which minoriti 1 in providing work-related and psychosocial benefits. However, the
can find and meet other minorities in their organization, thereby affecting tl ysis of these strategies shows they may not attain the desired results in terms
number, strength, pattern, and resources of their network ties. This reduc advancing minorities into the upper ranlts of organizations. To g e t past the
feelings of isolation, and allows them to act as “majority” members for a perio rriers presented by the similarity-attraction paradigm, tokenism theory, and
of In a sample of members of the National Black MBA Association, isting organizational structures, organizations need to ensure opportunities for
inajority members. “How Corporate America Is Betraying Women,” Fortune (January 10, 2005): 65-74.
Coi7zpany: How Social Capital Makes Orgc~nizations Work, social capital is Holding Women Back?,” I-larvard Business Review (June 2003): 18-19.
created when employees have the opportunity to participate in “real work” with 4. Belle Kose Ragins, “Diversified Mentoring Relationships in Organizations: A
Francine D. Blau and Marianne A. Ferber, The Ecolzonzics of Women, Men and Work employees to interact is not sufficient for developing the types of trusting
(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice I-Iall, 1987).
context of performing real work, employees can discover similar values, a Management,” Anzericalz Psychologist 45 (1990): 200-208.
tudes, and beliefs held by iildividuals who initially appear dissimilar. Hence, 7. Linda I<. Stroh, Jeanne M. Brett, and Anne M. Reilly, "All the Right Stuff: A
employees are able to look beyond initial differences and communicate inore mparison of Female and Male Managers' Career Progression," Ioumal of Applied
effectively with each other. chology 77 (1992): 251-60.
minority employees. Collaborative relationships are characterized by ltnowl- External Labor Market Career Strategy?,” \ounzal ofApplied Psychology 82 (1997): 331-41.
edge of each person’s expertise, a willingness to engage in active and timely 9. George F. Dreher and Taylor H. Cox Jr., “Labor Market Mobility and Cash
10. Jacqueline Landau, “The Relationship of Race and Gender t o Managers’ receiving novel ideas and a greater variety of feedback, which should enhance
ltnowledge sharing and creation.
Furthermore, IVIeyerson and Fletcher advocate experimenting with incre- the Top? An Examination of Influences on Women’s and Men’s Managerial Ad-
ganizatioilal procedures and assumptions, practices that undermine equity for rieda Reitrnan, “The Interrupted Managerial Career Path: A Longitudinal Study of
women and minorities can be modified or removed.99 For e x a ~ n ~ l e , require- MBAs,” Ioumal of Vocational Behavior 51 (1997): 41 1-34.
ments for a line position that are unnecessary for performance but eli~ninate 12. Wayne Baker, Achievilzg Success through Social Capital: Tapping the Hidden
minorities from the applicant pool can be dropped. By providing women with Resources in Your Personal and Business Networks (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000).
advancement opportunities, battling gender stereotypes, and rewarding man- 13. Paul S. Adler and Seok-WOO Kwon, “Social Capital: Prospects for a New
Theory of Career Success,” Academ)~ of Malzagemerlt Ioumal 44 (2001): 2 19-37. Breaking down the barriers to advancement for women and minorities must
become a corporate imperative, not just because it is the ethical step to take but Networking: A Guide to Successfully Navigating Career Changes,” ~r~alzizatiolzal
also because it is good for business. A recent study by Catalyst of 353 Fortune Dylzamics 31 (2002): 245-58.
500 companies found that those with the highest representation of senior 16. Elizabeth Wolfe Morrison, “Newcomers’ Relationships: The Kole of Social
women had a 35 percent higher return o n equity and a 34 percent higher return Network Ties During Socialization,” Academy ofManagement \ounzal45 (2002): 1149-60.
to shareholders than those companies with the lowest number of high-ranking 17. Joel M. Podolny and James N. Baron, “Resources and Relationships:
worne i~ . ‘~ ‘ Perhaps organizations with higher proportions of minorities in upper Social Networks and Mobility in the Workplace,” American Sociological Review 62
management ranlts are talting better advantage of both their employees’ human
and social capital, a worthy goal for every company. 18. Mark S. Granovetter, “The Strength of Weak Ties,” Americarl Ioumal of So-
19. Mark S. Granovetter, Getting a lob: A Study of Contacts and Careers (Cam-
20. Morten T. Hansen, “The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in
1. Cora Daniels, “The Most Powerful Black Executives in America,” Fortulze
High Places: T h e Effects of Social Networks on Discrimination in Salary Negotiations,”
Adininistrative Science Quai-lerly 45 (2000): 1-24.
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992).
Charles Galunic, “More than Network Structure: How Knowledge Heterogeneity In-
fluences Managerial Performance and Innovativeness,” Strategic Manageinent ]ournu/
25 (2004): 541-62.
work Analysis lor Organizations,” Acadeiny of Manageinent Review 4 (1979): 507-19.
Strength of Ties: Structural Factors in Occupational Status Attainment,” American So-
ciological Review 46 (1981): 393-405.
I
Effects: The Importance of Relational Demography in Superior-Subordinate Dyads,”
Academy of Management ]oumal 32 (1989): 402-23.
1958).
30. W. Gary Wagner, Jeffrey Pfeffer, and Cha~ le s A. O’Reilly 111, “Organizational
terly 29 (1964): 74-92.
agement: A Conceptual Framework,” Acade7izy of Maizageinent Review 18 (1993):
56-87.
Managerial Networks,” Acadeiny of Maizagernent ]ounldl 38 (1995): 673-703.
Nehvork Structure and Access in an Advertising Firm,” Administrative Science Quarterly
37 (1992): 422-47.
Sex Ratios and Responses to Token Women,” A~nericai~ ]ounzal of Sociology 82 (1977):
965-90.
36. Robin J. Ely, “The Power in Demography: Women’s Social Constructions of
37. Karen S. Lyness and Donna E. Thompson, “Above the Glass Ceiling? A
Psychology 82 (1997): 359-75.
terns and Influence in an Organization,” Acadelny of Management ]ounlal 28 (1985):
327-43; Ibarra, “Personal Networks of Women and Minorities”; Ibarra, “Homophily and
Differential Returns.”
and Inequality,” Social Psychology Quarterly 57 (1994): 190-209.
agement,” in Gerald R. Ferris, ed., Research in Personnel and Huinan Resources Man-
ageii~ei~t (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 2004), pp. 13:39-79; Daniel J . Brass, Joseph
Galaskiewicz, Henrich R. Greve, and CVenpin Tsai, “Taking Stock of Networks and
Organizations: A Multilevel Perspective,” Academy of Maizagen~ent ]ournu/ 47 (2004):
795-817; Podolny and Baron, “Resources and Relationships.”
Change: The Effect of a Change in Technology on Social Network Structure and
Power,” Adiiziizistratii~e Science Quarterly 35 (1990): 104-27.
43. Cecily D. Cooper and Nancy B. IZurland, “Telecommuting, Professional
Organizational Behavior 23 (2002): 51 1-32,
46. Jeffrey Pfeffer, “A Political Perspective on Careers: Interests, Networks, and
Hai~dbook of Career Theory (Cambl-idge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp.
380-96.
48. Kathy E. I
49. Reba Keele, “Mentoring or Networking? Strong and Weak Ties in Career
Women (Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1986), pp. 53-68.
51. Belle Rose Ragins, “Barriers to Mentoring: The Female Manager’s Dileinma,”
52. Ellen A. Fagenson, “The Mentor Advantage: Perceived Career/Job Experi-
309-20; Terri A. Scandura, “Mentorship and Career Mobility: An Empirical In-
vestigation,” ]ounzal of Orgaizizatioizal Behavior 13 (1992): 169-74; William Whitely,
Tho~nas CV. Dougherty, and George F. Dreher, “Relationship of Career Mentoring and
Socioeconomic Origin to Managers’ and Professionals’ Early Career Progress,” Acadelny
of Maizageineizt Journal 34 (1991): 33 1-5 1.
ward Understanding the Effects of Multiple Developmental Relationships,” ]ounlal of
Orgaizizaiional Behavior 22 (2001): 223-47; Ralph E. Viator, “An Analysis of Formal
Mentoring Programs and Perceived Barriers to Obtaining a Mentor at Large Public
Accounting Firms,” Accounting Horizoizs 13 (1999): 37-53; Ralph E. Viator and Terri A.
Scandura, “A Study of Mentor-ProtCgC Relationships in Large Public Accounting
Firms,” Accouizti~zg Horizons 5 (1991): 20-30.
and John Id. Cotton, “Easier Said than Done: Gender Differences in Perceived Barriers
Noe, “Women and Mentoring: A Review and Research Agenda,” Acadellz)~ of Manage-
ment Review 13 (1988): 65-78.
56. Kram, Mentoring a t Work; Ragins, “Barriers to Mentoring.”
57. George F. Dreher and Ronald A. Ash, “A Comparative Study of Mentoring
ofApplied Psychology 75 (1990): 539-46; Belle Rose Ragins and Terri A. Scandura, “The
Way W e Were: Gender and the Termination of Mentoring Relationships,” l o ~ ~ m a l of
Applied Psychology 82 (1997): 945-53; Whitely et a]., “Relationship of Career.”
velopmental Relationships (Mentoring and Sponsorship): An Inter-Organizational
Study,” Iounznl of Organizatior~al Belzavior 11 (1990): 479-92.
60. George F. Dreher and Taylor 1-1. Cox Jr., “Race, Gender, and Opportunity: A
Journal of Applied Psyclzology 81 (1996): 297-308.
62. Belle Rose Ragills and Dean B. McFarlin, “Perceptions of Mentor Roles in
39; Terri A. Scandura and Ethlyn A. Williams, “An Investigation of the Moderating
Effects of Gender on the Relationships between Mentorship Initiation and Prottgi:
Perceptions of Mentoring Functions,” Journal of Vocatio~zal Behavior 59 (2001): 342-63.
64. Monica L. Forret, Daniel B. Turban, and Thomas W. Dougherty, “Issues
and Orga~zizatiotz Develo/~rnent Journal 17 (1996): 27-30; Kathryn Tyler, “Mentoring
Programs Link Employees and Experienced Execs,” NR Magazine 43 (1998): 98-103.
Mentorships: A Co~nparison on Mentoring Functions and Contrast with Nonmentored
Counterparts,” Persorz~zel Psychology 45 (1992): 619-36; Belle Rose Ragins and John L.
Cotton, “Mentor Functions and Outcomes: A Cornparison of Men and Women in
Formal and Informal Mentoring Kelation~hi~s,” Journal of Applied Psychology 84
(1999): 529-50; Belle Rose Ragins, John L. Cotton, and Janice S. Miller, “Marginal
Mentoring: The Effects ofType of Mentor, Quality of lielationship, and Program Design
on Work and Career Attitudes,” Academy of blanagernelzt Journal 43 (2000): 1177-94;
Scandura and Williams, “An Investigation.”
67. See Ragins and Cotton, “Mentor Functions.”
68. Michael B. Arthur and Denise M. Rousseau, eds., The Bouizdaryless Career:A
Press, 1996); Monica C . Higgins, “The More, the Merrier? Multiple Developmental
Relationships and Work Satisfaction,” lounzal of Management Developri~e~zt 19 (2000):
277-96; Monica C . Higgins and Kathy E. IZram, “Reconceptualizing Mentoring at
Work: A Developmental Network Perspective,” Acade7izy of Ma~zage~r~ent Review 26
(2001): 264-88; Higgins and Thomas, “Constellations and Careers.”
stellations and Careers.”
Behavior for Managerial and Professional Employees,” Group and Orga7zizatiol1 Maiz-
agenzent 26 (2001): 283-3 11.
73. Keele, “Mentoring or Networking?”
74. Forret and Sullivan, “A Balanced Scorecard Approach.”
75. Robert J. DeFillippi and Michael B. Arthur, “The Boundaryless Career: A
Michael B. Arthur, Kerr Inkson, and Judith IZ. Pringle, The New Careers: I~zdividual
Action and Ecorzo~nic Change (London: Sage, 1999).
Career Outcomes: Differences for Me11 and Women?,” \ o ~ ~ r n a l of Organizatio~zal Be-
havior 25 (2004): 419-37; Fred Luthans, Richard M. Hodgetts, and Stuart A. Ro-
senkrantz, Real Managers (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1988); James Michael and Gary
Yukl, “Managerial Level and Subunit Function as Determinants of Nehvorking Behavior
in Organizations,” Group and Orgaizization Managenzent 18 (1993): 328-51; Sam
Gould and Larry E. Penley, “Career Strategies and Salary Progression: A Study of Their
Relationships in a Municipal Bureaucracy,” Orga~zirational Behavior and Hunlalz Per-
fon~zance 34 (1984): 244-65.
78. See Forret and Dougherty, “Networking Behaviors.”
79. Belle Rose Ragins and Eric Sundstrom, “Gender and Power in Organizations:
and Women’s Networks”; Ibarra, “Personal Networks of Women and Minorities.”
81. See Gould and Penley, “Career Strategies.”
82. Forret and Dougherty, “Correlates of Networking Behavior.”
83. Arlie Russell Hochschild, The Secoitd Shift (Ne\v York: Penguin Books, 2003).
84. Douglas T . Hall, The Career Is Dead-Long Live the Career: A Relational
85. Ray Friedinan, “Defining the Scope and Logic of Minorib and Fenlale
search in Personnel nrzd Humaiz Resources Marzagenze11t (Greenwich, C T : JAI Press,
1996), pp. 14:307-49; Ray Friedmall, Melinda Kane, and Daniel B. Cornfield, “Social
Support and Career Optinlism: Examining the Effectiveness of Network Groups among
86. Elizabeth Lesly, “Sticking it Out at Xerox by Sticking ‘Together,” Business
87. Catalyst, Creating Womeiz’s Networks: A Mow-To Guide for Wonzelz and
88. Ibid.
89. See Friedman, “Defining the Scope.”
90. Ibid.
91. See Friedman, &ne, and Cornfield, “Social Support.”
92. Catalyst, Creating Women’s Networks.
thl
OSS
be
pea
~ i t e
eve
: sh
lple
3ut
shc
d al
get
7lw;
C01
1rec
‘hat
94. Catalyst, Creating Wollzerz’s Networks.
95. ILid.
96. Don Cohen and Laurence Prusak, In Good Coinpaizy: I-low Social Capital
97. Rob Cross, Andrew Parker, Laurence Prusack, and Stephen P. Borgatti,
99. Meyersorl and Fletcher, “A R/Iodest Manifesto.”
(March 28, 2005), web24.epnet.com (assessed July 4, 2005).
Other Important Business Rules
a room from the center to the front and women from the center to the back! In
an office setting, unless they have an assigned seat at the table, wulllen tend to
take chairs on the The11 they have a great idea, and they’re sitting in
outer space; thc boss is sitting at the table. Tlie action is happening among the
people at the table. A woman has something to say and begins, “This may be an
idca we have tried before, bu t . . .” W e know 1,001 things to say before the word
but. Then the woinan quietly explains her idea, preceded by a conditional
phrase. She knows she achieved her current position because she is “perfect” and
does not want to speak up in the meeting unless her comments are perfect. She
says something quite intelligent; others at the table murmur, and the meeting
continues.
sitting at the table even though he doesn’t necessarily belong there, rephrases her
idea. He says, “We should-” and suddenly, the power structure says, “That’s a
great idea!” As people leave the room, the man and the boss discl~ss the idea, and
the womail walks out with a female friend discussing the fact that the man stole
her idea. Actually, she gave it away! A real friend doesn’t say, “Yes, he stole your
idea.” She says, “You said it, but he’s actually the only one at the table who really
being so concerned about whether it is perfect.
perfect.” If you’re always at the meeting table and others say what you wanted to
say, maybe you think, “1 thought of that three weeks agu,” or “I was about to say
that.” None of that counts. Learn that nobody ever got fired for saying something
stupid. Actually practice. Say so~~~et l l i r ig stupid at a meeting once, and discover
that you don’t get fired. T h e boss only hears and discusses the smart ideas, never
the stupid thirigs; that’s why that person’s the boss.
√ = ____
√ in your Organization = ____,
Organizational Dynamics, 31(3), pp. 245-258.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
