It’s Friday and always a good time for some end-of-the-week humor.  Recently, a woman I admire and had the privilege of working with for several years shared an interesting article with me that appeared in the July, 1943 issue of “Mass Transportation Magazine.”  It was written for male supervisors of women in the work force during World War II.  It was titled, “Eleven Tips on Getting Efficiency Out of Women Employees.”  I can sense the smirk already forming on your face!  Pace yourself!

The article began with: “There’s no longer any question whether transit companies should hire women for jobs formerly held by men.  The draft and manpower shortage has settled that point.  The important things now are to select the most efficient women available and how to use them to the best advantage.”

The article then shared those 11 tips on hiring the most efficient women for the formerly male jobs and ensure they were productive.  I’ll summarize below:

1. Pick young married women.  They usually have more of a sense of responsibility than their unmarried sisters, they’re less likely to be flirtatious, they need the work or they wouldn’t’ be doing it, they still have the pep and interest to work hard and to deal with the public efficiently.
2. When you have to use older women, try to get ones who have worked outside the home at some time in their lives.
3. General experience indicates that “husky” girls – those who are just a little on the heavy side- are more even tempered and efficient than their underweight sisters.
4. Retain a physician to give each woman you hire a special physical examination- one covering female conditions.
5. Stress at the outset the importance of time – the fact that a minute or two lost here and there makes serious inroads on schedules.
6. Give the female employee a definite day-long schedule of duties so that they’ll keep busy without bothering the management for instructions every few minutes.
7. Whenever possible, let the inside employee change from one job to another at some time during the day.  Women are inclined to be less nervous and happier with change.
8. Give every girl an adequate number of rest periods during the day.  You have to make some allowances for feminine psychology.
9. Bet tactful when issuing instructions or in making criticisms.
10. Be reasonably considerate about using strong language around women.
11. Get enough size variety in operator’s uniforms as that each girl can have a proper fit.  This point can’t be stressed too much in keeping women happy. 

Now, I happened to have majored in Economics in college and spent considerable time studying efficiency theories (actually I’m a huge fan of efficiency theory which is why it’s a complete patience exercise for me when a driver takes the scenic route to get somewhere! Hello, think about how a crow flies!).  In my four years of study, I have to say I didn’t see one efficiency model that included a variable for “husky” girls.

When you read these “tips,” it’s easy to see the many ways our society had progressed regarding the views of women in the workplace.  If these were the hiring and managing tips, working women faced considerable challenges in 1943.  It’s with admiration that I think about what brave trailblazers were among them!

Given the above tips, it almost seems silly that 70 years later I would let a little thing bother me like being told to wait outside the men’s room while 3 executive managers went it to discuss my area of expertise prior to an important meeting with authorities.  At least I was hired for my expertise and not my marital status, age or waist size!  And I wasn’t required to take a special physical for females!  But yet, 70 years later, I was told to “wait here.”  Maybe being bothered by that exclusion isn’t so silly………….

In the 10^th grade I was faced with the task of telling my then-boyfriend I wanted to move on.  He was a really nice guy, but he just didn’t interest me anymore.  I didn’t want to hurt his feelings and I was naïve enough to think that I could “let him down easy” and we could still be friends. (Did I mention I was naïve?) The soft approach resulted in three awkward break-up attempts before he got my message (which wasn’t very clear).  More specifically, my first two attempts didn’t involve an honest conversation.  That situation was the beginning of my understanding that clear communication works better.  As Benjamin Franklin said, “Honesty is the best policy.”

This isn’t to say that I’ve been flawless ever since in applying this understanding, but I have tried as best and bravely as I could to apply that lesson in my professional life.  I’ve had the privilege of working with countless teams and managing people for many years.  I’ve evolved and learned along the way about how to motivate people and help them find their potential.  Like parenting, I’ve made mistakes and I’ve had some pretty incredible wins.  My management style is such that I give my employees honest and respectful feedback covering both things they did well and things not so well.  I don’t give hugs when people screw up and I don’t hand out participation trophies to make people feel better.  My intentions are to help people know what works really well for them and where they should focus for improvement.  And so I’m totally clear, I’m not a coddler.  I try to be direct, clear, honest and respectful.  No more three awkward attempts when providing feedback!

At one point in my career in a one-on-one meeting with my then boss, he suggested that I should consider softening my communications.  He believed my direct communication style turned some people off.  (Actually, he may be right, but that could be people that don’t want to hear the truth!).  So I accepted his feedback and considered making changes to my approach.  As I was reflecting on this, I realized there were several of my male counterparts that were far more aggressive in their communication style than I.  In fact, one of these individuals had been a direct report of my boss for years.  I was confused.  I had witnessed first-hand conversations in meetings where these counterparts in question even bordered from aggressive to attacking!  I needed more information from my boss.

At our next one-on-one, I told him I needed to ask him some questions about that feedback previously provided.  I told him I felt I could ask him probing questions and that our relationship was such that he would give me honest answers.  So I asked, “Would you have given that same suggestion to Phil, Mark or Rex?  I’ve observed their general approach is far more direct than my own.” 

“You have a point and no, I would not give them the same feedback.”

“Is that because they are male and I’m a female.”

He pondered for a few moments and said, “Yes, that probably has an impact, but you are going to have to learn how to deal with these gender differences.”

I was impressed he was so honest with me (I prefer honesty), but I wasn’t pleased with the suggestion that I had to learn how to deal with different communication expectations based on gender.  This isn’t different expectations about how many push-ups I could do versus my male counterparts (although I think I could top several of them).  This wasn’t about different communication expectations based on my roles and responsibilities within the organization.  This was about communication and more specifically, that because I was female I needed a softer delivery.  Why? 

What I finally realized is that if I wasn’t willing to soften my communication (READ: change who I am) then I would be limiting my career opportunities at that company.  I would have to be satisfied with waiting right where I was, or worse, seeing my career slip.  In the end, I wasn’t willing to wait there.  It just wasn’t acceptable.

You Wait Here is about being alienated by others because of your gender.  It is when others have determined, based on your gender, your presence, opinions, ideas, input or views are not considered welcome and/or relevant.  My focus is on those situations that have occurred to women.  And those situations aren’t necessarily perpetrated by men.  It could occur at the hands of other women.  

A co-worker, Beth, shared a story with me that fits into “You Wait Here.”  She, a successful attorney at a financial institution and mother of two small children, was on a conference call that included her boss (who was leading the call), other members of in-house counsel and several attorneys from an outside law firm.  Except for Beth, all of the participants on the conference call were males.  As with many conference calls, people are calling in from multiple locations, including from home.  Beth was working from her office at corporate headquarters.  It was the first meeting of the business day and she had not seen her boss yet that day as they worked on different floors. 

During the course of the call, someone’s small children could be heard in the background causing a distraction for participants on the call.  Beth’s boss, who was leading the call, interrupted the meeting and asked Beth if she could disconnect from the call as others could hear her children.  She quickly informed her boss that she was there in the office and those were not her children.  An attorney from the outside law firm the confirmed that indeed it was his children that could be heard in the background.  He was not asked by Beth’s boss to disconnect from the call, but to please mute his line.

Not only did her boss assume the children must belong to the only female participant on the call, but when corrected he didn’t as the man to disconnect from the call as he had Beth.  Further, he never apologized, either publically or privately, to Beth for his behavior.  It could be that her boss was so incredibly unaware of his prejudices that he didn’t recognize his own behavior.

Do you have a similar story or know of someone who does?