Sex stereotyping in the workplace: a manager's guide - Women in Business

Business Horizons, March-April, 1993 by Eileen P. Kelly, Amy Oakes Young, Lawrence S. Clark

Remand to District Court. On remand, the court applied the rules articulated by the Supreme Court. To prevail, Price Waterhouse had to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Ann Hopkins was denied partnership because of her poor interpersonal and management skills-- not because the firm used impermissible stereotyping in partnership review and evaluations. Again, Price Waterhouse failed. In finding that the firm had violated Title VII, the court stated the following:

Price Waterhouse has failed to separate ...comments tainted by sexism from those free of sexism for the purpose of demonstrating that non-discriminatory factors alone justified the whole decision .... Price Waterhouse simply notes repeatedly that Ms. Hopkins was rejected because of her perceived inadequate interpersonal skills. This approach begs the question to the extent to which the perceptions of her interpersonal skills were tainted by sexism.

The district court then awarded back pay in the amount of $371,000 and required that Price Waterhouse make Hopkins a partner. The court made this decision even while acknowledging that such forced employment/partnership situations were extremely difficult for the parties.

MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS

To foster a positive work environment, enhance productivity, and avoid legal liability, employers need to avoid any appearance of sexual stereotyping in the workplace. This necessity is particularly relevant now that the 1991 Civil Rights Act permits punitive damages in sex discrimination cases. With such high stakes at risk, employers and partners alike need to limit potential legal liability. Management strategies for minimizing sex stereotyping in the workplace are given below.

Foster Commitment of Top Management

Employers must first educate themselves in the nature and invalidity of sex stereotyping. Without top management's acknowledgment of the problem and commitment to its eradication, efforts to raise the awareness of sex stereotyping in the rest of the organization will be of little use. Top management's role in establishing the corporate culture is critical. In the Hopkins case, the partners at Price Waterhouse clearly established an "old boys club" atmosphere that permeated the entire organization. This allowed sex stereotyping to flourish in employment decisions. In the aftermath of the extensive litigation of the Hopkins suit, no doubt, the corporate culture at Price Waterhouse has changed dramatically. Unfortunately, it took nine years of litigation and a costly settlement to foster that change.

Adopt Gender-Neutral Terms in the Employment Setting

Employers must stress the need to use genderneutral terms in supervisory comments and company documents. Managerial or supervisory comments regarding gender or what a male or female "should be like" should not be tolerated. For example, in the Hopkins situation, Price Waterhouse could easily have stated that "Hopkins has problems with staff relations and lacks appropriate interpersonal skills." Such an evaluation would be far more appropriate and less open to legal challenge than comments on Hopkins being too macho, overly aggressive, or unfeminine. Gender-neutral terms and references make potential discrimination suits more difficult to prove.