One day, Queen Equipment happened to be in a good mood (we never did find out why!) and cheerfully supplied all requested supplies with a smile. Meanwhile, Princess Admin was having a bad day—or perhaps a good day, because she actually said no to one of those unwanted jobs.
The result of this pole shift was amazing to behold. Everyone spent the day praising the many wonderful attributes of Queen Equipment—she was so good at her job, she was so efficient; yes, she might get annoyed sometimes but she always came through—what a wonderful woman, what an asset to the company!
Princess Admin, however, suffered the disapproving glares of all who passed by her desk throughout that day, and people whispered in corridors and over coffee about how difficult she was to get along with, how moody, how … bitchy!
Was one a darling and the other a bitch? Neither was either. Both were ordinary people who had their own problems, worries, and lives.
We teach people—through our actions, words, and attitudes—how to treat us. When we respect ourselves, others usually respect us in return. When they don’t, it’s probably the result of their own lack of self-respect, their own fears and frustrations—it rarely has anything to do with us personally. We merely taught them that we’re willing to accept the role of scapegoat.
CHAPTER 10
Heart Versus Head
I’m sure that feeling-preferred females and thinking-preferred females misread each other. We can be more assertive and outspoken than more touchy-feely women. Feeling-preferred females are more scared of us than we are of them. They tend not to push back.
—Jaya
Many of the problems encountered by women working with women are based on communication, whether it’s poor or completely lacking. Women tend to expect more of other women when it comes to communication at work, believing that a rewarding shared experience of work is more likely than an overbearing, excluding, or negative experience. Most women want to work in congenial environments with collaborative colleagues who acknowledge and respect their contributions. They’re hurt when working with women goes wrong, and sometimes jump to the conclusion that their manager or colleague is a bitch. But perhaps she simply has a different way of communicating.
By understanding how we make decisions at work—how we come to conclusions that govern a course of action—it is possible to understand a boss, a colleague, or an employee’s behavior and to manage communication better. By doing this, we might discover that the differences in communication style are not there because she’s a bitch; it might be that her head rules her heart, and you’re the opposite. You might still have a problem with communication, but it might be more easily managed than if she’s an Excluder or a Narcissist or a Screamer.
We’re all familiar with the idea that our hearts can sometimes rule our heads, and vice versa. People are often heard to say, “My head says this, but my heart says that.” But unless they are interested in psychology, most people are not aware that the concept of making decisions based on thinking or feeling is part of Jung’s theory of psychological types. Jung noticed that people have the capability to make decisions according to two sets of criteria: thinking and feeling. If you make a decision that is based on logic and reason, you are operating in the thinking mode. If you make a decision that is based on your value system, you are operating in the feeling mode. While we use both modes for making decisions, depending on the situation and type of decision, we tend to put more trust in one mode over the other. Thinkers make decisions in a rational, logical, impartial manner, according to what they believe to be fair and correct, as determined by objective rules of behavior. Feelers makes decisions on the individual case, subjectively, according to what they believe to be right within their own value system.
Research indicates that more women base their decisions on their feeling personal value system. That is, they ask themselves how the decision impacts upon their self and their values. They consider the decision in terms of whether it’s good or bad. Research statistics have yet to be finalized, but it is generally considered that 75 percent of Western women base their decisions on subjective, interpersonal values. They are ruled by their hearts—they have a feeling preference.
The remaining 25 percent base their decisions on logical analysis. That is, they ask themselves whether it is an analytical, rational decision. They consider the decision in terms of whether it’s right or wrong. They are ruled by their heads—they have a thinking preference.
In contrast, most men have a preference for rational, analytical decision making—a thinking preference. For example, research data collected in a paper mill in northeastern Pennsylvania, with a sample size of 3,200 employees and 337 managers, found that 8 out of 10 male managers and 6 out of 10 female managers have a thinking preference. Psychological research being conducted in the United States and other countries identifies higher proportions of female thinking-preferred managers than feeling-preferred ones. These preliminary findings echo Australian published findings that 3 out of 4 female managers demonstrate a thinking preference, despite only 1 out of 4 females generally demonstrating a thinking preference.
Generally, anecdotal observations from American men and women invariably agree that most female managers tend to have a thinking preference, more in keeping with male preference for thinking, while female staff tend to demonstrate a more feeling preference. This means that most female managers base their decisions on an objective, analytical, logical thinking perspective. They might list the pros and cons to come to a final decision. If we accept that most women have a feeling preference but most female managers have a thinking preference, it’s easy to see that these differences are likely to cause miscommunication or at least misperception about communication at work.
If most women use a feeling-preferred method, yet most female managers use a thinking-preferred method, then various women are likely to use different criteria and different language in the decision-making process. And it’s quite possible that communication difficulties based on thinking and feeling preferences among women may contribute to the mislabeling of behavior as bitchy.
Before your discomfort in working with a bitch escalates to a highly stressful or intolerable level that endangers your career, consider strategies that could improve the communication between you and her. Since the “mean girl” you work with isn’t likely to want to change, you are more likely to be the accommodating one—you want to improve a dysfunctional situation. It isn’t fair, and it places yet another burden on you, but to make an informed decision about whether you can tolerate staying at work or need to leave, consider this another tool you can implement when interacting with her to make your workplace better.
Thinking (Her) Versus Feeling (Me)
Improving communication won’t eliminate bitchy behavior, but it may lessen the strain and enable you to more easily tolerate a difference in style. You can learn to communicate using her preferred style and improve the quality of understanding.
Are You Mostly Thinking or Feeling Preferred?
Imagine that you work in a medium-sized company and manage a group of twelve staff with approximately the same level of experience and competence. Your boss tells you the company is losing money and has to cut costs by reducing staff numbers. You have to lay off three people on your team. You can decide which people go, but they will have to leave in three weeks’ time.
Take a few minutes to consider how you would deal with this situation. There are no right or wrong answers. Write down your decision-making process.
Now, imagine that your mean girl manager or colleague was asked to make the same decision. Note down the process that you imagine she would use for making her decision.
The feeling-preferred woman will typically resist the directive. She will be concerned about the fate of the staff leaving and how they’ll be supported through the process. She might suggest that the company investigate transferring them to other internal positions, that everyone take a pay cut to prevent the layoffs, or that optio
nal reduced hours be introduced. She might decide to find out if any staff want to take severance packages and will try to find a way to redeploy the remainder.
The thinking-preferred woman will focus on a fair selection process. She will worry about the future of the company and will focus on what her team needs to function best and which staff will best serve that purpose. She will not waste time looking at other solutions for saving costs to avoid laying people off.
Both ways of dealing with the situation have pros and cons. In fact, ideal managers (both male and female) are those who can balance thinking preferences and feeling preferences according to the nature of the decision.
Take the Questionnaire
Compare the two columns shown here, line by line, and select either the thinking or the feeling option, checking off the words or phrases that most apply to you. If you really can’t decide, skip the pair and go on to the next pair.
THINKING FEELING
Objective values Subjective values
Principles based on “what” Principles based on “who”
Non-personal Intra-personal
Analytical, logical, clarity Situational, personal, harmony, empathy
Intention important Actual behavior important
Cause and effect, task Personal impact, esprit de corps
Sceptical, critiquing, tough Trusting, accepting, compassionate, tender
More inclined to competition More inclined to cooperation
Use logical analysis to reach conclusions Use values to reach conclusions
Can work without harmony Work best in harmony with others
Can hurt people’s feelings unknowingly Enjoy pleasing people
Tend to decide impersonally Decisions influenced by my likes/dislikes
Sometimes pay insufficient attention to others Influenced by others’ likes/dislikes
Tend to be firm-minded Tend to be sympathetic
Can give criticism when appropriate Avoid telling people unpleasant things
Look at the principles involved in situation Look at the underlying values in situation
Feel rewarded when job is done well Feel rewarded when people’s needs met
Ask “What is the cost?” Ask “How will people react?”
Positive and negative outcomes? Who is committed to carrying this out?
What is the consequence of not acting? Will this contribute to group harmony?
Objectivity Subjectivity
Equality Individuality
Logical analysis Empathic consideration
I walk in and get on with it I walk in and I can feel the mood of people
THINKING TOTAL: FEELING TOTAL:
Add up your checks for each list. The highest number of ticks indicates whether you have a thinking or feeling preference. Scores might be very close, perhaps only one or two points’ difference between the Thinking column and the Feeling column, or you might have an extremely high score for one column and a very low score for the other. Remember that this does not measure skill or imply lack of skill; you are merely selecting your preference.
Women use both thinking and feeling in making decisions; they tend to use one process first then the other, or select the process most relevant to the nature of the decision. Here we are looking at whether thinking or feeling behaviors are your most trusted tool. Which preference tends to be your default position—the one most likely to influence you?
Comparing Apples and Oranges
You are sitting in a meeting where an important decision has to be made and the group can’t come to a consensus. The arguments are heated, and no matter what is said, the meeting is not progressing. Worse than that—it’s as if half the room is talking about apples, and the other half, oranges. Neither half can help the other half to comprehend its concerns.
Why can’t your manager see the world in the same way that you do? Why does your colleague or assistant insist on viewing life so differently from you? Why don’t they get it? Chances are, it has to do with thinking or feeling preferences.
Different women’s ways of seeing the world and making decisions aren’t better or worse; they are simply different. The more we understand difference, the more resources we have to improve communication and resolve difficulties.
When making decisions about information, we initially use our preference for either thinking or feeling judgment. You can easily distinguish between thinking and feeling preferences by observing how women go about making their decisions and the language they prefer to use. This comparison does not imply superiority of using either objective principles or personal values; it simply identifies the type of judgment we are likely to prefer as our greater influence. Clearly, our decision will often require either thinking or feeling preferences, and we tend to use both in varying degrees—but women will generally have a preference for how they go about making their decisions and the type of words they tend to use.
Today, thinking-preferred people are generally overrepresented as managers in organizations, regardless of culture. This doesn’t mean they are natural managers; it simply means that the job description, usually efficiency and effectiveness, presumes thinking. Whenever an organization gets into trouble—a scandal, mismanagement, or a similar problem—it will inevitably be over a feeling issue, relating to how people are treated, safety rules, and so on.
Economic models presume a thinking preference. Thinking-preferred women are generally unconvinced by feeling arguments, seeing them as emotional. Feeling people are apt to see thinking arguments as cold and hard. Both opposites have to learn the other language in order to communicate productively. Feeling-preferred people usually want to be liked by managers (and staff) and prefer harmonious environments. They are more inclined to collaboration than competition, except when a strong value is at stake.
Both thinking- and feeling-preferred women and men can be exemplary leaders, managers, and followers. As we progress in the twenty-first century, the skewed percentage of thinking-preferred female leaders and managers is starting to be redressed.
When people are in conflict, it is often about a values clash, and the thinking-feeling dichotomy can help us understand what’s behind the frustration or communication difficulty. The following two comments by a thinking-preferred woman and a feeling-preferred one typify the state of mind of these two opposite personality types.
Jaya, Thinking Preferred
If I am annoyed, upset, or grumpy, I don’t want the other woman in the office to hover in my space, asking what she can do to make it better. Keep away until I am ready to reengage. When a feeling-preferred female asks me anything that requires a feeling response, I really don’t know, so those questions are uncomfortable—they make me feel incompetent and I can’t answer. Don’t touch me, pat me, kiss me, or hug me without permission.
Remember that I find it hard to be soft and welcoming, and I am not sure what to do or say to make you feel better. Don’t assume that I am not interested or don’t like you. Tell me what you would like from me; then I am able to respond.
Erica, Feeling Preferred
If I’m upset or hurt, show your interest and concern. You could ask if I would like to talk about it now or later. When we do speak, actively listen with your entire body. Don’t nod “yes, yes, I get it” while you flick through your in-tray or check the time. Don’t quickly solve the problem and produce the solution. Demonstrate that you wish to work with me to resolve it. I may feel overwhelmed, and you could help by offering some ideas or prompts, or getting me a cup of coffee. That demonstrates you are willing to wait. Don’t rush to closure, but check in case there’s more I need to express. Reassure me that we can get through this, and things are still okay between us.
In the next two stories, two women with feeling preferences handle the communication clashes with their thinking-preferred boss in different ways.
Larissa, 30s, Officer Administration
Larissa, a warm, helpful person who cared about her clients, felt that her manager wa
s harsh and cold. Larissa and her manager had an obvious clash in their thinking and feeling values and language.
I had been happily doing my job for a few years, but a new manager didn’t seem to like what I did and the way that I did it. She criticized my efforts and questioned my priorities. I felt destabilized. I found myself excluded from casual Friday lunches, and this led to my feeling marginalized and ostracized from the others in the team. After a few months, I noticed the others huddled together chatting, but when I approached, they broke apart and scattered. It looked suspicious—were they talking about me?
I felt that my manager wouldn’t allow me enough time to do a task but ignored the fact that others needed the same amount of time that I did. By now it was obvious that my manager didn’t like me. At one stage, I thought I heard her mocking the way I spoke to clients.
My manager insisted that I work on days when I wasn’t scheduled; she didn’t respect my shift hours the way my previous manager had. I was forced to wait several weeks before being advised that I had passed my performance review. I felt anxious about whether my position was secure.
I had always organized staff farewells, birthdays, celebrating achievements, and putting Christmas decorations up in the lunchroom. I was told to stop doing these things because they were a silly practice, a waste of time, outside my job specifications, and generally unnecessary. At one point, I was replaced on a steering committee without first being alerted; I felt humiliated and not good enough. The company encouraged further study for its employees, so I enrolled in postgraduate study, but my manager refused to allow me to leave early to attend classes.
Working with Bitches Page 17