Sure, it’s easy to see networking as using people to get
ahead but only if it’s one sided (in my opinion anyway) – if I can benefit you
and you can benefit me, I don’t see a problem with that. However, I don’t
recall our readings addressing networking’s use leading to being happy in a
career, and how it possibly differs by gender: to me, networking seems like the
playing field should be level, at first shallow thought anyway, but I stumbled
upon an article on how networking and career development can be viewed
differently by men and women (van Emmerik, Euwema, Greschier, & Schouten,
2006).
van Emmerik et al. (2006) make the distinction between formal
networks put in place by an organization and informal networks, those that form
organically, and how they both can lead to advancement. Within these networks
though, van Emmerik et al. (2006) cite learned gender roles and behavior, that
men are supposed to be strong forward thinking to get ahead and women are
supposed to be more sensitive to others and put more value in relationships. I
find it interesting putting these gender definitions within the networking
context for a variety of reasons: The first is sure, those are stereotypical definitions,
but I’m sure we’ve all experienced situations, and more than one, where that
stereotypical idea didn’t hold up – I’ve known men and women that were
networking to get ahead in an aggressive and annoying way. I find networking for advancement and career
satisfaction is probably based more on ambition, which I don’t think knows
gender. Sure, traditionally men were
supposed to be more ambitious, but I think that’s just because that’s what
we’ve been told or shown. The second idea
I find interesting is that if women are supposed to put more value in
relationships, shouldn’t those networks be stronger, whether formal or informal,
and lead to stronger career advancement and satisfaction?
van Emmerik et al. (2006) did find, ultimately, that women
did engage in formal and informal networking than men, yet men used networking
to advance their careers more.
This article and conclusion seem odd to me. In my mind, one should lead to the other, and
to me there should be no gender difference or advantage. Or at the every least, networks should be
well rounded and advantageous for everyone.
References
van
Emmerik, Ij H., Euwema M. C., Greschier, M., & Schouten, M. (2006). Networking
your way through the organization: Gender differences in the relationship
between network participation and career satisfaction. Women in Management Review, (21)1. 54 – 66. doi: 10.1108/09649420610643411
Hi Justin - This sounds like it was an interesting article. With the increase over recent decades of women entering the workforce, I wonder what effect that has had on networking, if networking has shifted from a more formal activity based on social status and affiliations (think Pete Campbell's family history helping him find work on "Mad Men") to a more egalitarian, relationship-based approach that you describe having higher female participation. I'd also be interested to know these researchers' take on how gender differences in network work across organizations, say in a community of practice like a PRSA or IABC, versus just within one company. It sounds like a lot of these principles would still apply, but with new dimensions to account for different organizational cultures.
ReplyDeleteJustin, your investigation of gender roles in networking relationships is intriguing. My guess as to why women, whose networks might be stronger and yet don't use those to leverage for job advancement might be a reflection of how men and women have different goals for their networks. In general, maybe for women, friendship in general is the highest goal, and for men, personal advancement might be the highest goal.
ReplyDeleteAgain, I'm just guessing.
First, I love that Andrew threw out a Mad Men reference.
ReplyDeleteMany people have said that one of the reason the wage gap exists is because women ask for promotions and raises less often than men. A study by the Washington Post debunked this, showing that women asked just as often, but they received less in return. Perhaps this could be an underlying reason why women ask less of their well-developed networks.
Ibarra and Hunter (2007) list three different types of networks every leader should develop: personal, operational, and strategic. I wonder if men and women differ in terms of which networks they focus on developing. Does this article lend any insight into that?
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/01/10/401419/study-women-raises/?mobile=nc
I agree that networking and career ambition are qualities that defy gender. I wonder if the authors' conclusions on gender roles and behavior are rooted in research or drawn from prevailing stereotypes. Also, if the former, what age group are we talking about? Can we really assume that women in their 20s adhere to the same behavior model as women in their 50s or 60s?
ReplyDeleteAnd speaking of Mad Men, it's almost a study in the changing roles of women in the early 1960s. Compare Peggy Olsen to her mother, or to Joan for that matter! (I'm only in Season Three - no spoilers, please.)
I love anytime pop culture finds its way onto the comments below my posts. If we can get a Breaking Bad reference before the end of the semester I'd have to call this one of the best classes ever.
ReplyDeleteThe article you linked to is interesting Dr. Pade and I think that's what why I was thinking while reading the article I posted. I don't understand ambition limited by gender as nearly all my female friends are more ambitious than my male friends (maybe I need new male friends to level the playing field).
That's a good question about age Will. And I would guess age does affect it.
Age, gender and culture. It's very interesting working a global organization and experiencing the different ways you build networks based on culture and how bridges and links are built.
ReplyDelete