Gender differences in workplace communication

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

Federal state autonomous educational institution

for higher professional education

NATIONAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY HIGHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS

School of Foreign Languages

BACHELOR'S THESIS

Gender differences in workplace communication

Field of study: Linguistics

Degree programme: Foreign Languages and Intercultural Communication

Olga Kravchenko

Supervisor: Professor M.B. Bergelson

Moscow, 2020



Content

Introduction

1. Gender communication

1.1 The concept of gender. Theoretical approaches to gender

1.2 Overview of gender differences in communication styles

1.3 A comparative analysis of communication styles of males and females at workplaces

1.4 Differences in leadership styles of males and females

1.5 The implications of gender differences in communication at workplace

2. Research study of gender differences in communication at workplace

2.1 The structure and methods of the research study

2.2 The results of the research study

2.3 Analysis of the results obtained

Conclusion

References



Introduction

The topic of communication styles has been quite well researched by scholars. A significant number of academic papers has been focused on gendered communication styles. The key focus of this graduate paper is gender differences in workplace communication.

The problem of the research study is considered to be highly relevant, because the investigation of men's and women's communication styles helps to eliminate detrimental gender bias and stereotypes in the workplace.

It is critical to carry out a research study on the issue as the investigation of gender differences in workplace interaction may contribute to fostering workplace diversity and building positive workplace environment. Moreover, research on peculiarities of gender communication can enhance the quality of organizational communication and, consequently, lead to higher productivity of both male and female employees.

The predominant purpose of the investigation is to study speech peculiarities of male and female employees. The piece of writing aims to achieve the following goals:

1. to examine the concept `gender';

2. to define major similarities and differences between language use of men and women;

3. to determine characteristics of formal gendered communication;

4. to examine men's and women's leadership styles and strategies;

5. to analyze the effects gender differences entail for corporate communication;

6. to conduct an experiment using both qualitative and quantitative methodology.

The object of the research study is organizational interaction. The subject the graduate paper studies is male and female language use.

In the paper it is hypothesized that there is a distinct set of differences between male and female employees. These differences, presumably, have a notable impact on the work of an organization.

The academic work is divided into four segments: intro, a theoretical background, an empirical background and outcomes. We should note that the research has the following theoretical significance: we carried out an extensive review of academic literature on the subject.

The practical significance of the work is reflected in the questionnaire on the topic of workplace communication. The results of the experiment conducted can be further investigated.



1. Gender communication

In this chapter a theoretical part of the research study is presented. The theoretical part of the thesis paper is based on literature review. The chapter consists of five sections. The first paragraph analyses the concept of `gender' as a notion from sociological perspective. The second paragraph gives an insight into gendered communication styles and their differences. In the third section we present a comparison between men's and women's communication patterns at workplace. Next, leadership strategies are examined. The fifth paragraph is focused on the effects gender differences have on the work of an organization.

1.1 The concept of gender. Theoretical approaches to gender

In this paragraph the notions of 'gender' and 'sex' are defined and differentiated. Gender is studied as a social construction. We investigate the concepts of masculinity and femininity and their content. Next, the paragraph provides an overview of the three theories of gender:

1) structural functionalism and its origins;

2) symbolic-interaction theory and its illustrations;

3) social conflict theory and its connection with the feminist movement. The debate on the origins of gender differences in communication is studied.

To begin with, it should be recognized that each society may ascribe a different meaning to gender, but the concept of gender exists in all societies. Numerous studies have been directed towards examining gender. They focus on various aspects but the vast majority of modern approaches to the concept suggest that gender refers to the personal and social characteristics - but not the biological traits - that are associated with different sexes.

It is profound to underline the difference between the terms "gender" and "sex" since they are not interchangeable. It is generally accepted that sex refers to “the biological characteristics distinguishing male and female” (Lindsey, 2013) and it is predetermined and, clearly, invariable. Gender, however, is seen as “a dimension of social organization” (Macionis, 2017) and, consequently, is a variable. (Neculaesei, 2015) In other words, gender is a complicated construct that is produced by members of a society. Accordingly, gender roles can be defined as “the expected attitudes and behaviors a society associates with each sex.” (Lindsey, 2013) The whole system of gender is based on the principle of contrast: men and masculinity are opposed to women and femininity. Thus, it could be argued that what it means to be female and male is mostly a creation of society.

It is safe to assume that the impact of these social constructs on human interaction appears to be tremendous. In fact, gender has a considerable influence on the way society is organized. Specifically, gender entails hierarchy which manifests itself in the unequal distribution of wealth, power, and privilege across genders. (Macionis, 2017)

The type of gender structure that seems to be predominant in virtually all societies is patriarchy. Patriarchy can be characterized as a form of social organization in which men have more power and dominate other genders. (Macionis, 2017) At the same time, female dominated cultures have been an extremely rare phenomenon throughout human history. (Lindsey, 2013)

The basis of patriarchy is sexism, the belief that one gender is innately better than others. (Macionis, 2017) Patriarchal societies are maintained by attitudes, behaviors, and systems that favor men.

Every culture attributes great significance to gender. In sociology three theories of gender are primarily discussed: structural-functional theory, symbolic interaction theory, and social conflict theory. (Lindsey, 2013) All three of these theories have different perspectives on the origins of gender.

Structural functionalism understands human behavior as part of systems that help to keep society organized and functioning. Gender is essentially perceived as a means of organizing society into specific complementary roles. (Zdravomyslova & Temkina, 2015) This approach to gender is demonstrated by American sociologist Talcott Parsons (Parsons, 1955).

He claimed that complementary gender roles are needed to preserve steady and effective family units. From his perspective, boys are socialized to participate in paid employment, whereas girls are taught to become mothers and wives. (Parsons, 1955) The theory effectively implied that distinct masculine and feminine gender roles maintain order in society.

Next, the main focus of symbolic-interaction approach is on face-to-face interaction, and daily routine. (Macionis, 2017) This theory states that gender can be viewed as something that a person "does". (West & Fenstermaker, 1995) To put it differently, gender is not inherent or enforced by institutions.

This illustrates how society's perceptions of masculinity and femininity are inseparably linked to each gender's standing in society. Masculine traits represent strength, independence, and aggression and are generally ranked higher than feminine characteristics which are associated with emotionality, passivity, and nurturance. (Meyerowitz, 2008). Basically, this approach suggests that everyday social interaction reproduces and supports gender stratification.

Finally, social conflict theory argues that gender is “a structural system that distributes power and privilege to some and disadvantage to others.” (Macionis, 2017) In other words, gender is seen as related to class and race. Intersection theory contends that, in fact, there exists a multiplicity of different aspects of disadvantage based on gender, ethnicity, citizenship, sexuality and other identities. (Zdravomyslova & Temkina, 2015)

Gender conflict theory is closely intertwined with the feminist movement. Feminism can be defined as “support of social equality for women and men, in opposition to patriarchy and sexism.” (Macionis, 2017) By and large, feminism advocates the obliteration of gender stratification and promotes equality. (Extracted from Term paper 'Cultural determinants of gender roles' by Olga Kravchenko (2019))

Another significant aspect of the discussion is the question of determinants of gender differences in communication. Notably enough, there has been an ongoing debate on whether these gender differences have biological or social roots.

Deborah Cameron in her book 'The Myth of Mars and Venus' (Cameron, 2008) investigates the theories that can possibly explain where the differences stem from. According to the first theory, women are better at using verbal language and men are more action-oriented. This differentiation is explained by the fact that their brains are biologically wired so. To put it differently, it is evolutionary development that constitutes the central cause. This belief often may lead to a widespread misconception that women by nature have greater communication skills. However, the misconception can turn out to be extremely destructive when it comes to the process of employee selection in the workplace.

Another theory of gender differences in interaction suggests that social and cultural norms have a significant influence on the way both genders communicate. Maltz and Broker ("Gender Differences in Social Interaction | Introduction to Sociology", 2020) in their study put forward a hypothesis that the games we engage in at our early childhood shape our communication skills. In other words, feminine games can develop one's ability to form relationship and think in a flexible way. At the same time, masculine early socialization implies playing competitive team games. That may, presumably, lead to strategic way of thinking and pursuing fixed goals in communication. The research contends that the culture we are involved in has an impact on the content of men's and women's speech. Hence, one may deduce that gender differences in social interactions prove to be caused by nurture, not nature.

To sum up, gender proves to be a social construct that is created and enforced by societies. In addition, it should be emphasized that gender “shapes social behavior and organizational structures”. (Ridgeway, 2008) Therefore, it means that gender norms are supposed to facilitate political, economic, and social coordination. (Conway, Bourque & Scott, 1987) Obviously, it is profound to understand that gender role expectations have a significant influence on the culture of professional institutions.



1.2 Overview of gender differences in communication styles

This section describes differences in interaction style of men and women from the perspective of feelings and emotions. We explore objectives men and women pursue while talking. The use of particular utterances, intonation patterns and grammatical structures is analyzed.

As it has already been mentioned, the concept of gender represents a core dimension of communication differences. The impact of gender assumptions on communication patterns cannot be overestimated. Thus, the research could concentrate on general characteristics of male and female speech in order to identify very broad contexts.

Whereas male and female communication styles prove to be inherently different, the degree of these differences still remains to be a matter of controversy. This part of the investigation focuses on the basics of gendered communication.

Deborah Tannen in her paper “He said, she said” (Tannen, 2010) stresses that there is difference in communication patterns demonstrated by men and women. According to the author's analysis, men's conversations revolve around hierarchy, while women highlight connection.

The author provides an example: at a daycare each of the boys says that he is the best ball kicker. The following phrases are used - “Mine's up to there,” “Mine's up to the sky,” “Mine's up to heaven!” etc. This shows that the boys try to outperform each other. At the meantime, one girl asks another “Did you know that my babysitter has already contacts?” The second girl gives an echo response “My mom and dad too”, which serves to bring them closer. These situations demonstrate gendered patterns.

Similar situations may occur in the workplace. According to Tannen, men tend to think that women's indirectness seems to be a lack of confidence while women see men's conversational style as overbearing. For the same reason, men view asking for directions as an unpleasant experience.

Women, however, perceive this as an opportunity to connect to people. The author draws the conclusion that despite these difference men and women are aimed at the same goals - power and intimacy. It is noted that the aforementioned differences are not ultimate, though.

This leads to the conclusion that intimacy does not represent a contrast to competition. By and large, it may be deduced that power and connection seem to be closely intertwined. One could suggest that in conversation, men and women pursue the same goal - a proper balance between hierarchy and affinity.

One may assume that gender differences are inevitably manifested in language usage. As far as content is concerned, the difference is that women tend to employ words implying psychological processes, domestic sphere, children, and fashion more frequently whereas men are inclined to use words referring to current concerns, politics, sports, etc. (Newman, Groom, Handelman & Pennebaker, 2008)

The effects of gender on speech also include differences in language use. Female speech demonstrates a higher frequency of first person plural pronouns, auxiliary verbs, negations, euphemisms, evaluative adjectives (adorable, charming), and purposive cases while male speech can be characterized by frequent use of numbers, articles, first person singular pronouns, prepositions, and obscene words (damn, hell). (Newman, Groom, Handelman & Pennebaker, 2008)

More than that, men are more likely to refer to time, quantity, and perceptual attributes as well as use objective cases. (Haas, 1979)

Furthermore, in contrast to men, women has been reputed to have better pronunciation and use more correct grammar structures. Women are also reported to prefer rising intonation patterns, which is associated with softness and submissiveness, whilst men's speech is associated with falling intonation patterns, and higher frequency of imperative structures, which implies certainty, power and confidence. (Xia, 2013)

Gender differences find their reflection in syntax. Men tend to be direct when asking a question; as opposed to men, women demonstrate a higher extent of politeness in their requests. (Xia, 2013) Next, in conversation, it is common for women to play a role of listeners and encourage other to participate. At the same time, men have a tendency to be dominant in conversations and interrupt others. (Haas, 1979).

What is also noteworthy is the fact that there could be particular gender differences when it comes to emotional intelligence (EI). The notion of emotional intelligence is defined as “the capacity to reason about emotions and emotional information, and of emotions to enhance thought”. ("What Emotional Intelligence Is and Is Not", 2020) Emotional intelligence is considered to encompass four basic elements - self-awareness, empathy, social skills, and the ability to interpret social information. (Leightner & Leightner, 2020) The process of gender upbringing has an influence on the sphere of emotional intelligence.

One may put forward an argument that women traditionally exhibit higher levels of emotional empathy, which means that, as a rule, they possess better skills of understanding and perceiving other people's emotional state. It is presumed women generally concentrate on the feelings involved in the situation while men try to repress emotions and turn to problem solving. ("Are Women More Emotionally Intelligent Than Men?", 2020) Hence, the conclusion may be deduced that women, on the whole, tend to be more sensitive than men. It could indicate that men, in turn, may be better at dealing with distressing and uncertain situations.

As for conflict management, men and women employ different approaches. Males are perceived as more aggressive and assertive. Therefore, they mainly opt for competing styles of conflict resolution. On the contrary, women are viewed as more cooperative, which is why it is argued that they prefer collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating modes of conflict management. (Savio, 2014) These differences highlight the way men and women cope with conflicts. However, these differences are not ultimate. That implies that nowadays men often choose to collaborate and more and more women assert themselves in a competing manner. gender leadership female communication

Although man and women do have different conversation styles, it is pivotal that the investigation of these differences paves the way towards deeper and more profound understanding of communication failures. The awareness about these differences can prove to be enriching and improve gender interaction.

1.3 A comparative analysis of communication styles of males and females at workplaces

In this section we discuss the already existing research papers on the topic. Critical analysis of the findings of previous researchers is provided.

There has been a great number of studies on the topic of communication styles (Jong, 1977; Jespersen, 1949). The issues of gender communication styles have received a great deal of attention among researchers (Lakoff, 1973; Kramer, 1974). In recent studies, there has been much emphasis on gender differences in communication (Tannen, 1994; Baumann, 1976, Key, 1996, Merchant, 2012). In general, the scope of the investigation carried out is quite extensive. Different scholars pursued different objectives in their studies. Previous research has both valuable contributions and certain limitations.

Being a pioneer in this realm, Robin Tolmach Lakoff in her fundamental work Language and Woman's Place (Lakoff, 1973) approached gender differences in communication investigating particular phrases. In essence, she puts emphasis on the fact that women tend to employ hedges in their speech. To put it differently, one of peculiar features of women's speech is so called hedging. Women are inclined to use phrases like “sort of”, “it seems” as a rule in order to make aesthetic judgments or cognitive statements. This way, this contributes to a less harsh expressive means. Additionally, women also may use hedges while describing one's psychological state. Lakoff brings us to the conclusion that it is typical of females to avoid strong opinions.

The next point the author touched upon is the prevalent use of tag questions by women. It is asserted that such a frequent use of this grammatical structure may have the following explanation: on the one hand, these questions are less certain than direct judgments but, on the other hand, express higher degree of certainty than “yes” or “no” questions. This intermediate context is supposed to give women more space for flexibility even in those situations when they lack certainty.

Robin Lakoff provides an example. When a woman needs certain information but, at the same time, is determined to disguise the fact that she is not completely confident, she may say - 'John is here, isn't he?'

Next, another critical feature the researcher highlighted is women's preference for excessively polite structures. It is claimed that there is a large number of functions of politeness in women's language. First of all, extremely polite forms of expression serve as a means to avoid open confrontation and making decisions. Secondly, women are believed to use such forms in order to mitigate views, personal feelings, and mental judgments. Thirdly, politeness can be implemented with a view to softening commands making them sound less tough. Forms of politeness are capable of transforming orders into kind requests without forcing people to act (`Won't you please close the door?')

More than that, Lakoff was convinced that there exist groups of words characteristic of females. She believed that when expressing admiration instead of neutral adjectives women are more likely to opt for gender ones. The group of “gendered” adjectives includes “adorable” instead of just “great”, “lovely” and “divine” instead of “neat”. The author stated that only women would use these particular emotionally sensitive words.

The next point of discussion is the necessity to switch between these two languages (feminine and neutral) in accordance with social situations and societal norms. The author supposes that the need to be aware of one's word choice can lead to some degree of discomfort for women in formal situations. As a result, they may demonstrate lower levels of participation in group discussions or conferences.

The author of the publication stressed that males and females tend to use contrasting phrases and sentence structure. More importantly, the author put emphasis on the fact that these language differences may serve as a reflection of non-linguistic disparity between male and female genders. In other words, it is assumed that the differences stem from different upbringing of babies in their childhood, unequal treatment of different sexes, and different gender expectations society places on men and women.

For instance, in the research study Robin Lakoff claimed that these differences manifest themselves in the use of swear words. Traditionally, men are brought up to occupy the position of power. Therefore, they feel comfortable expressing their emotions in a more straightforward manner. This pattern can be observed in the frequency of use such swear words as “hell” and “shit”. Women, at the same time, tend to avoid cursing for the reason that this behavior is not perceived as acceptable and will not be tolerated by society.

Robin Lakoff presumed that not only do women participate less in conversations, but also they feel more comfortable making apologies. This case can be perceived as a sign of male social dominance, strength and female weakness and exclusion.

In addition, Robin Lakoff suggested that women prefer to use more indirect, uncertain, and polite communication patterns due to the social position they occupied in the 1970s society.

The research study is crucial for the reason that the research could give a deeper insight into the meaning these specific phrases communicate. The implications of the study were later confirmed by Mulac & Lundell (1986). At the same time, it is noteworthy that the limitation of Lakoff's research is the limited scope of empirical evidence.

Lynette Hirschman in her research study Female-Male Differences in Conversational Interaction (Hirschman, 1994) speculated on the peculiarities of women's participation in male-female conversations. Her piece of writing still remains to be one of the most influential works and continues to be frequently cited. The author of the paper predominantly concentrated on the following aspects: proportions of the talking process between men and women, use of specifiers, personal pronouns, and processes of interrupting. First of all, she proposed that in conversation women: 1) tend to employ fillers more often. So called “fillers” can be referred to as words that do not add any new information to the utterance. The study examined such fillers as “you know”, “oh”, “well”, “um”, “like”, “I mean”. It was deduced that while talking to their male counterparts females demonstrated higher degree of hesitation. The prevalent use if these fillers could indicate that women feel uneasy interacting with opposite gender and often have to search for suitable words.

Lynette Hirschman in her research study also made the second point: 2) women give more affirmative responses. Apparently, according to the paper, there is a disparity between men and women when it comes to affirmative answers. In the study such words as “yeah”, “okay”, “all right” fell into the category of affirmative responses. At the same time, Hirschman pointed out that the concept of affirmative response may be rather controversial. On the one hand, affirmative answers can be viewed as expression of consent, which implies that a woman agrees with the speaker. But on the other hand, “yes” may have a slightly different meaning. It also can indicate that a woman follows the mode of speech of her male conversation partner.

The author of the study also put forward an argument concerning the flow of conversation. By and large, a major generalization can be made: 3) in male-female conversations women act as facilitators. What this argument implies is that women have a tendency to come up with questions to their male conversation partners. Predominantly, males' role in male-female interaction in this case is to provide responses.

In addition to this, Lynette Hirschman formed a hypothesis that is focused on females' responsiveness. The author proposed that when interacting with men women are likely to 4) recognize the other speaker's phrases. Unlike men, who tend to challenge other speaker's statements or simply ignore them, women provide acknowledgement to these utterances. More importantly, women are reported to build on their conversation partner's statements. The assumption could be formulated that women are more flexible when conversing with the opposite gender. It should be acknowledged that the data analyzed in the paper are quite limited.

Dominic Savio in his paper Gender Differences in Emotional Intelligence (Savio, 2014) examined the gender differences in emotional expressions. In essence there are particular differences in psychological competences, sensitivity, emotion management, and empathy. Dominic Savio makes an assumption that since childhood women are better at using verbal language to express their psychological state. Men, on the contrary, are encouraged to suppress their emotions, which leads to their limited scope of emotional expressiveness. In addition to this, the author stresses that women's stronger emotional competences and men's limits in this department result in communication failures.

Moreover, it is hypothesized that women are able to memorize a larger amount of sensitive information. This could mean that women are more sensitive to their surroundings. Also, they have stronger skills of indicating and interpreting other person's feelings. Higher emotional intelligence in women may help them create successful interpersonal connections.

As for emotion management, Dominic Savio highlights that men demonstrate better coping skills when it comes to negative emotions. The judgment may also imply that women tend to avoid uncertain situations and seek confidence. Men, on the other hand, tend to take risks and strive for outstanding achievements.

Next, in the paper, special attention is given to empathy. In short, there is no conclusive evidence that women are more empathetic than men. It is believed that both genders are equally equipped with cognitive empathy and sympathy.

The author underlined that women's emotional expressions tend to be considerably strong whereas men may express their emotions inadequately. The conclusions of the research paper can help to comprehend the role of emotions in communication failures.

However, Mehl & Pennebaker (2002) in their research investigated conversation samples as well. As a result, they discovered that in female speech more words referring to positive emotions, not emotions as a whole, can be found.

The book by Deborah Tannen You Just Don't Understand (Tannen, 2013) has been a landmark contribution to the studies of conversational styles of men and women. In this work the author concentrated on gender conversation differences that lead to communication failures. The author highlighted that such miscommunication is typical of male-female interactions.

Deborah Tannen explained that there exist a number of areas where misunderstandings frequently occur. She observed that in conversation men tend to focus on domination, autonomy, providing practical help, information, commands, and competition. Women are reported to focus on closeness, loyalty, recognition, senses, offers, and concessions. Importantly, data in this research indicate that differences in conversation prove to be inherent to male and female genders and go beyond the rules of early socialization.

Another substantial field of academic interest is the peculiarities of formal communication styles of different genders. In her book Talking from 9 to 5 Deborah Tannen (Tannen, 2001) investigated gender differences in conversation in a public context, or in the workplace. The author of the study puts forward an argument that due to different communication styles men and women inevitably encounter misunderstandings.

Tannen demonstrated that women in managerial positions may experience difficulties since their manner of communication prevents them from growth they strive for. The author explains that women apologize more often, provide mild criticism, and treat their colleagues as equals without any sense of superiority.

As a result, women are perceived as less competent and confident as man. Deborah Tannen observed that it is absolutely crucial to learn to be flexible and acknowledge a wide multiplicity of managerial styles. This research study proves to be important in that it revealed the underlying cause of workplace conflicts between different genders.



1.4 Differences in leadership styles of males and females

The section concentrates on the peculiarities of male and female leadership styles. Strengths and weaknesses of these styles are reviewed.

Shawn Andrews in his paper Gender Communication in the Workplace (Andrews, 2013) presented a research on gender differences in the behavior in the office.

The author of the paper tends to believe that there is difference in the way men and women perceive the process of negotiation. It is asserted that men prefer to perform coordination before the discussion itself. Women, however, see such meetings as an opportunity to discuss the agenda openly.

Besides, there is a sharp contrast between genders when it comes to presentation of themselves at conferences and meetings. Men, as a rule, have a tendency to interrupt more and do most of the talking. They try to avoid being exposed to someone's influence. As for women, they prefer not to interrupt, provide brief presentations and formulate their ideas as questions.

Another point Shawn Andrews touches upon is the way men and women actually communicate in the workplace. The following illustration can be provided: males and females talk in a different way while assessing their achievements and fails. Men are inclined to take all the credit for the work carried out whereas women, on the contrary, may give acknowledgement to other people's contribution.

As far as failures are concerned, the author of the paper points out that men are more likely to put the blame on other people. Women, however, typically blame themselves for non-performance. Apparently, these differences could possibly lead to differences in how coworkers perceive male and female leadership strategies.

Furthermore, Shawn Andrews managed to outline distinct differences in gendered communication patterns as well. It is claimed that men, in general, show better abilities to understand verbal signals than women do. Women, conversely, are able to perceive a larger number of non-verbal cues. For instance, one may notice that, while social interaction, women tend to nod their head quite frequently. This non-verbal signal is used to let a conversation partner know that they are listening. Men usually nod actively only if they approve of what is being said.

Also, the work was centered on gender in leadership styles. The author asserted that in organization structure men and women demonstrate notable differences in the way they approach leadership strategies. Men tend to feel more comfortable in hierarchical structures and frequently obtain controlling leadership style. Thus, male leaders commonly prefer implementing this strategy when working under pressure and coping with emergency situations.

As for female leadership, women are reported to prefer multifaceted organizational environment and choose to collaborate and compromise. In addition to this, they often opt for more engaging strategies. It would be fair to say that this type of leadership style is essential for supporting creative environment in the workplace. It seems reasonable to assume that these differences in leadership may have a tremendous impact on one's career prospects and the development of corporate image and culture.

The implications of the research study may be profoundly important. The conclusions can be used in follow-up studies of organizational communication and leadership gap.

Moreover, the issue of leadership differences was explored by Vinita Mohindra in the paper Gender Communication: A Comparative Analysis of Communicational Approaches of Men and Women at Workplaces (Mohindra, 2012). In the research study it is suggested that, when talking to their colleagues, men have a tendency to incorporate direct requests into their speech and use blunt language patterns. What is more, male counterparts are not inclined to give compliments on someone else's good job. The author made an assumption that in the workplace men have a tendency to prioritize indicating goals and coming up with solutions. Male employees are also reported to build connections when carrying out an assignment. When it comes to the sphere of decision-making, men go through the process of consideration internally. Male leaders avoid sharing personal information and, clearly, prefer to discuss public events, news, or facts. Furthermore, men tend to tell jokes in order to gain authority.

As for female coworkers, it was noted that women are generally more sensitive to the needs of others and communicate in a more expressive manner. Females, even in top leadership positions, refrain from using harsh or aggressive words. Women are more likely to share information about past experiences, or current emotions. They manifest their high status and power by being extremely polite, which makes them it easier for them to maintain business relations. Unlike men, women tend to build rapport before starting working projects. Moreover, while figuring out solutions, female leaders are reported to process information externally.

It is common for female leaders to speak in a respectful manner and indirect manner. Additionally, women are observed to give thanks to other employees on a regular basis. Besides, as leaders, they reinforce the sense of equality in the workplace and employ person-oriented approach. The study is important in that it provides an abundant amount of data is baked up with extensive empirical evidence. Besides, it is absolutely crucial to raise awareness between gender leadership differences since miscommunication in organization may cause workplace dissatisfaction and lead to inefficient information flows.

1.5 The implications of gender differences in communication at workplace

The final paragraph of the theoretical part offers an overview of negative influence gender differences in communication may entail. Strategies and tools to eliminate communication failures are investigated.

It can be beneficial to take into consideration that different communication styles and strategies may represent a valuable opportunity or a serious obstruction. Therefore, one should remember that the social context, settings, timing and other circumstances play the most important role.

It would be fair to say that gender differences may result in certain limitations in the process of communications. What is more, it is probable that this differentiation can create obstacles for the effective workplace environment.

Tammie Belephant in the research paper Communication Styles: Increasing Awareness Between Genders in the Workforce (Belephant, 2017) came to the conclusion that different gender communication styles employed in the workplace can, in fact, lower the efficiency of working processes. Besides, it was pointed out that this interferes with information flow and distorts the perception of certain messages.

Ineffective communication may also deter employees from personal development and professional growth. Moreover, if managed inappropriately, gender differences in communication might hinder employees' promotion.

However, it is also profoundly important to be able to accept these differences. Otherwise, communication with the opposite gender will lead to a fair amount of continuous psychological discomfort.

The author of the research paper is convinced that there are a great number of measures that could be taken in order to rectify communication failures. One possible way to mitigate the effects of limited understanding between genders is to acknowledge the objectives of efficient workplace interactions.

First of all, according to Tammie Belephant, it is highly important to educate corporations on how to endorse harmonious relationships between employees. Secondly, another vital objective is to make sure that employees have a crystal clear vision of their mission.

One more way to overcome gender language barrier is to set realistic expectations. By doing this, corporate leaders have an opportunity to foster positive working atmosphere.

In addition to this, when employees manage to build more positive relations with their colleagues, it helps them to boost their self-image and self-esteem. Consequently, they achieve a more clear perspective on their working responsibilities.

There is a set of particular set of skills and tools that can facilitate the process of workplace communication between genders. The first point is the following: employees of both genders will benefit from building up resilience. Resilience can be defined as “an ability to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change”. ("Definition of RESILIENCE", 2020) It also helps to boost overall working performance and heighten employee morale. Moreover, resilience impacts the way individuals approach workplace challenges. The level of resilience can be enhanced by exploring new communication techniques. The ultimate goal of resilience is to give employees an insight into the value of diversity within an organization.

The second necessary ability to take into account is system thinking. In the paper Tammie Belephant gives the following definition of system thinking: “seeing the interconnections and relationships within an organization”. (Belephant, 2017) By developing system thinking employees acquire better skills of identifying roles in the corporate environment. What is also crucial to emphasize is that system thinking can help to overcome workplace uncertainty. This valuable tool is believed to improve workplace coordination, which leads to higher degree of trust between colleagues.

The research study may have significant implications since it deals with the techniques of overcoming communication gap between genders.



2. Research study of gender differences in communication at workplace

In this chapter an empirical part of the research study is presented. The chapter is divided into three paragraphs. The first paragraph provides an outline of the organization and methodology of the research. The second paragraph concentrates on the description of the results of the practical investigation. And the third paragraph focuses on a detailed analysis of the results obtained. The results obtained require speculation on possible explanations of the outcomes. Moreover, in this paragraph potential implications of the results are discussed.

2.1 Structure and methods of the research study

The hypothesis of the research is that there exist differences in communication styles of men and women in the workplace. We conducted a research to test this hypothesis.

As far as methodology is concerned, in the empirical part of this research study both quantitative and qualitative methods were implemented. The objectives the empirical part pursued was to examine (compare and contrast) the way males and females communicated in the workplace. A questionnaire was designed and administered to the respondents. The practical background of the experiment conducted was based on Discourse Completion (DCT). Traditionally, a typical Discourse Completion Test is carried out in the written form and includes a particular number of situational questions. (Bentsen, 2020)

The survey was completely anonymous and all the data collected were presented as general conclusions. The vast majority of the respondents of the survey were graduates of HSE University.

On the whole, thirty young people participated in the research study. We managed to collect data from fifteen male respondents and fifteen female respondents.

As for questionnaire organization, the survey consisted of nine questions. The respondents were supposed to give answers in the following format: agree or disagree with a statement, and choose one answer in multiple choice tasks. Participants of the survey were also asked to express their agreement with the statement on the scale from one to five. Besides, the participants were offered open-ended questions that implied particular workplace situations. These situations were focused on workplace requests, meeting participation, expressing gratitude, conflict resolution methods, workplace ethics and leadership styles, upward and downward organizational communication.

Question №1 was the following: 1. 'I feel comfortable promoting myself and stating my career ambitions openly'. The respondents were supposed to express their attitude to the statement. They were offered a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 - 'I completely disagree' and 5 - 'I completely agree'.

The purpose of the questions was to elicit information concerning the respondents' level of assertiveness in communication and their determination to compete. We anticipated that women would be more apprehensive when it comes to communicating their career goals or aspirations or giving credit to themselves. It was expected that men, in contrast, would be more comfortable articulating their career ambitions and talking about their achievements. In other words, the assumption was made that women are more fearful of being perceived as aggressive. Men were expected to demonstrate higher ambition levels.

Question №2 contained the following statement: 'At meetings and conferences I prefer to actively participate in the discussion and proactively communicate my ideas'. The respondents were supposed to express their attitude to the statement. They were offered a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 - 'I completely disagree' and 5 - 'I completely agree'.

The objective this task pursued was to gather information on the level of willingness of both genders to communicate their opinions openly. Also, the assumption that male counterparts frequently do most of the talking and interrupt more was tested. Women were expected to let other speakers talk more often and wait their turn.

Question №3 was designed to study what leadership strategy men and women prefer. The participants were asked to agree or disagree with the statement: 'My leadership style can be characterized as collaborative and compromising rather than competing and controlling'. We expected that women would rather opt for collaboration and compromise whereas men would explicitly prefer competition and control. It was presumed that women would be more approachable as leaders. Men, on the contrary, were supposed to demonstrate their preference for commands and strong hierarchical structures.

Question №4 concerned the question of career compliments. The statement was the following: 'I compliment my coworkers on the work they do and how they are exceptional at it'. The question had multiple options to choose from. The options included: 'never', 'sometimes', 'frequently', and 'always'. The question served to provide an insight into the level of appreciation men and women give to their colleagues. We assumed that women would acknowledge someone else's job more frequently than their male counterparts do. Women were expected to give more compliments on someone's skills and abilities.

Question №5 was related to upward communication. According to scenario described, one needed to negotiate a higher salary. The questions were formulated in the following way: 'What would you say to your boss? What reasons would you give?' The participants were supposed to write 1-3 sentences.

Negotiating a higher salary may perhaps be the most important conversation in the workplace. We anticipated that male employees would feel more comfortable negotiating with an employer. Male counterparts were expected to demonstrate that they are breadwinners and are extremely concerned with making more money. Women, on the other hand, were anticipated to avoid the question around salary.

The scenario in Question №6 described the following workplace situation: 'Your colleague tries to pass on their work to you. You have to refuse since you have your own work. So you say:' The participants were supposed to write 1-3 sentences.

The underlying purpose of the question was to determine how men and women would formulate their refusal to help. We presumed that men would act in a more direct and straightforward manner. As for women, they were supposed to speak more gently and polite, and make apologies for their refusal.

Question №7 was about downward organizational communication. The situational description was the following: 'You are in charge and need your subordinate to carry out an assignment. How would you phrase your request?' The objective of the task was to identify how comfortable both genders would feel giving orders. The respondents of the survey were asked to phrase their request in 1-3 sentences.

The anticipated outcome was that female employer would act in a more respectful manner. In other words, they were expected to treat their subordinates as equals. Male employers were supposed to show that they are more rigorous giving commands.

Question №8 concerned conflict management techniques. The statement was the following: 'You know that your coworker is acting unethically. What would you do?' It was a multiple choice question. The options included:

- Talk to them in private to discuss the problem.

- Report to the boss.

- Ignore it.

The task was designed to investigate what problem solving methods men and women would opt for in the workplace environment. We expected that males would choose to act more aggressively whilst females would attempt to cooperate.

Question №9 was related to leadership strategies and conflict resolution approaches. The participants were given the following scenario: 'You are in charge and notice a conflict situation between your employees. How would you deal with the matter?' The respondents of the survey were asked to phrase their request in 1-3 sentences.

It was assumed that male and female employees tend to behave differently. According to our hypothesis, women would handle the dispute more on individual level and employ person-oriented approach. Men, accordingly, were anticipated to be less sensitive to interpersonal relationships and use more linear language in order to make peace.

2.2 The results of the research study

The initial results were received in a form of charts and diagrams. Questions that required written answers are presented in this paper as citations.

1. I feel comfortable promoting myself and stating my career ambitions openly (scale from 1to 5)

As for male respondents, 20 per cent of men completely agree with the statement. 27 per cent would rather agree, and the same number of men is neutral. 20 per cent of participants would rather disagree with the statement. And 6 per cent of respondents completely disagree.

Talking about female participants, 27 per cent of women completely agree with the statement. 40 per cent would rather agree while 20 per cent are neural. 6 per cent would rather disagree, and the same number completely disagrees with the statement.

2. At meetings and conferences I prefer to proactively participate in the discussion and proactively communicate my ideas (scale from 1 to 5)

Male respondents: 20 per cent would rather agree with the statement. 47 per cent are neutral while 20 per cent would rather disagree. And 13 per cent of men completely disagree with the statement.

Female respondents: 13 per cent of the respondents completely agree with the statement. 33 per cent would rather agree while 13 per cent are neutral. 33 per cent of women would rather disagree with the statement. And 8 per cent completely disagrees.

...