With the world of business long dominated by men, it comes as no surprise that business culture tends to reflect traditionally masculine behavior—assertive, competitive, and agentic. But when Stephens noticed how this norm prevailed even in business schools, well before most of the students had a chance to entrench themselves in business, she was motivated to understand what might be driving that trend.
So she collaborated with a team of researchers—including Mindy Truong of the University of California, Riverdale; Hannah Birnbaum of Washington University in St. Louis; Andrea Dittmann and Sarah Townsend of the Marshall School of Business; Lydia Emery of the University of Chicago; and Rebecca Carey of Princeton University—to take a closer look at the dynamics of business-school classrooms.
The researchers examined the video recordings of 76 MBA classes at a business school in the Midwest, spanning 3,159 students and 46 professors.
After tracking every instance of student engagement, the team found that women disproportionately participated less often than men, suggesting that women likely felt less welcome to engage in class. The pattern held even after accounting for variation in classroom size, gender diversity, and opportunities for participation.
“Even when you have about 40 percent women in a business-school classroom, which is pretty close to balanced, you still have this gender disparity [in participation].”
Nicole Stephens
And the pattern, Stephens says, could have a domino effect.
“If you feel like you are included, comfortable, and have a voice, then you’re more likely to speak up,” she says. “And if you speak up, you’re more likely to get a better grade and that can then shape how you see yourself in the classroom or in the business setting and the types of jobs you have access to.”
Subtle cues, big impact
As part of their study, Stephens and her colleagues also tracked the professors’ behavior. They rated the professors’ warmth, likeability, comfort, and formality to determine whether they used more masculine or feminine behavioral cues, regardless of their gender.
For example, professors who used an approachable speaking style, made eye contact with students, and used humor or disarming language were characterized as exhibiting more-feminine behavioral cues than professors who maintained a flat, formal style. And professors who exhibited these feminine behaviors were characterized as more warm.
Though many of these behavioral cues were subtle, the researchers found that they were related to students’ participation. When professors’ behavioral cues in the classroom leaned more masculine during class, men participated much more often than women. But that gap in participation entirely disappeared when the professors’ behavior during class was more feminine.
“These are small, subtle differences; it’s not like there was some heavy-handed change in the classroom structure or in the type of professors,” Stephens says. This suggests that, “in theory, there are small changes that professors could make that could instill a much more inclusive climate where everyone feels like they can share in the classroom space more equally.”
The researchers conducted a follow-up study to test this idea. They asked 458 business-school students to imagine themselves in a business-school classroom. The students were randomly assigned to read a description of a professor who displayed either more-feminine behavioral cues (“friendly smile,” “relaxed posture,” “dynamic tone”) or more-neutral behavioral cues (“steady, flat voice,” “neutral expression”). Then the students indicated how they might respond.
Overall, when the professor used neutral cues, women were less likely than men to say they would participate. But when the professor used feminine cues, women and men were equally likely to say they would participate, and both were more likely to say they would feel included.
A culture of inclusion
The findings show that even the small, everyday behaviors of professors can have a significant impact on students’ experiences. The effect can be especially strong in gateway settings like universities that are generally meant to pave the way for people’s future success.
It further speaks to the importance of a culture of inclusion, where people feel like they have a voice and can engage in class or their work to the best of their abilities, Stephens says. When it comes to addressing gender gaps within institutions, “it’s not enough to let people in the door; we also have to think about what happens after people gain access.”
Though these lessons emerge from a classroom setting, Stephens believes the same dynamics are also likely to occur in business meetings or other organizational interactions. And assuming that’s the case, leaders should consider the type of culture that they create and whether their team feels secure enough to speak up at critical moments.
“The norms that get set early on in terms of who has a voice and who’s respected when they speak can have long-term consequences for people’s engagement and outcomes over time,” she says. “So I would encourage us to be more aware of the way in which our behavior reflects these norms and [how we can] create a culture that is more welcoming and open to everybody’s perspective.”
