EBSCOhost Page 1 of 4

Record: 1
Title: Gender in the Job Interview.
Authors: MAMLET, ROBIN1
Source: Chronicle of Higher Education. 3/17/2017, Vol. 63 Issue 28,
pA32-A32. 3/4p.
Document Type: Article
Subject Terms: *WOMEN college administrators
*EMPLOYMENT interviewing
*SEARCH committees (Personnel)
*COMMUNICATION strategies
*BODY language
*GENDER differences (Psychology)
Abstract: The author presents her thoughts on how to address issues
that limit women's advancement in higher education
leadership. She focuses on how candidates present
themselves in job interviews and how search committees
interpret these interviews. Topics covered include
communication strategies, body language, and gender
differences.
Author Affiliations: 1Managing partner of the education practice at the executive
search firm Witt/Kieffer
Full Text Word Count: 1272
ISSN: 0009-5982
Accession Number: 121910033
Database: Academic Search Premier
Gender in the Job Interview
Advice

AS WOMEN move up the leadership ranks in higher education, they find fewer and fewer female
peers. That's been fairly well documented by the American Council on Education and other sources,
and is no surprise to those of us in the executive-search industry.

Why that's the case is a topic fraught with complexity. There is the matter of stepping up and
Leaning In, to be sure, but there is also sexism -- sometimes the subtle kind, affecting who is
mentored, who is labeled "leadership material," who gets the kind of opportunities that lead to
advancement.

Of the factors that limit women's advancement, two are things we can resolve: how candidates
present themselves in job interviews and how search committees interpret these interviews.

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.spot.lib.auburn.edu/ehost/delivery?sid=fd9f492c-42f5-4a61-b7a... 10/5/2017
EBSCOhost Page 2 of 4

I often sit in on interviews with candidates wing for presidential, provost, or cabinet-level positions in
academe. In my experience, women and men seeking executive roles frequently present
themselves differently, and the differences typically do not work to the advantage of the female
candidates.

I am not suggesting that women should act more like men in interviews. There is a range of styles
used successfully by candidates of all genders. If candidates have a strong, substantive record --
built on experience and articulated clearly -- they can convey it through a variety of leadership
styles. Presentation won't make up for a lack of substance -- not for long, anyway.

And I understand the danger of making generalizations about gendered behavior. However, the
administrative careers of some women suffer from a misalignment between self-presentation and
interviewers' expectations. That dynamic could be improved with greater awareness on both sides of
the hiring table.

That women and men use different communication strategies is controversial but nothing new. In
her 1990 book, Yon Just Don't Understand, Deborah Tannen, a linguistics professor at Georgetown
University, spawned widespread 'discussion of the differences in personal communication styles
between men and women. (Women engage in "rapport-talk," she argued, and men in "report-talk.")

Here are some of the gender-related behavioral patterns I often see in executive interviews:

Body language. Most men seem comfortable claiming space. They employ a straight, high-
shouldered posture that suggests they are in command, and they don't mind spreading out at the
table or using open, sweeping gestures and body language that suggest authority.

Some women excel at that, too. They are comfortable occupying space, and they "own" their spot at
the interview table. Frequently, these are the few women who are already college presidents.

Amy Cuddy, a social psychologist and associate professor at Harvard Business School, studies
body language and "power posing" -- say, "standing and leaning on one's hands over a desk" versus
sitting (or standing) with arms held close, hands folded, legs crossed tightly. Cuddy's work is
controversial, but many candidates would benefit from reviewing it. Simply put: Some interview
poses and body language convey greater confidence.

Qualifiers. Women are more likely than men to sprinkle their responses with phrases like:

* "I don't deserve all the credit for that, of course "

* "I have not had that responsibility yet, but"

* "With more exposure in this area, I could "

It is rare that I see male candidates qualify their precise involvement in a success. But many women
go out of their way not to imply a disproportionate role. I can almost see the wheels turning in their
minds as they speak: "I have to be fair. I should not take credit for all of it."

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.spot.lib.auburn.edu/ehost/delivery?sid=fd9f492c-42f5-4a61-b7a... 10/5/2017
EBSCOhost Page 3 of 4

They are correct, of course. No one deserves sole credit for A institutional successes. Belaboring
that in a job interview, however, does not serve a candidate well. Women who feel the urge to credit
others at length during the interview might ask themselves: For whose benefit am I wading into this
level of precision?

I am not advocating that candidates claim credit for achievements that go beyond their efforts.
Briefly acknowledge the role of others, but don't dwell on it. The interview is about you.

Coaching the committee. Different types of leaders present differently in interviews. But while style is
important, results matter most. Search committees must recognize the dangers of prejudging
candidates or looking at superficialities. And committee members need to anticipate their own
tendencies and biases. Here are some of the things I tell them:

* Remember your goal: to find people who will succeed in the position, not necessarily ace the
interview. The creation of a comprehensive leadership profile is a precursor to an effective
committee.

* Don't be quick to judge. As humans, we form judgments in seconds. Search committees must give
candidates the whole 75 minutes or more. The best candidates are not always the most skillful in
talking about themselves. Sometimes they shine at the end of the interview or impress in nuanced
ways.

* Keep in mind that different people present themselves differently. Be on the alert for unjustified
overconfidence, or confidence masked by deferential motions or verbal qualifiers.

* Consider the potential for double standards and double binds. I recently had a committee member
express concern about a female candidate who, he felt, used "I" too often. Would he have noticed
that in a man?

* Beware of dazzlers: people who simply interview well. Committees need to make sure to explore
the depth of all candidates.

* Look at the big picture. Don't rely only on notes from the interviews. Incorporate information
gathered about candidates through referencing and behavioral and leadership assessments.

Most of all, I talk with search committees about broadening their conception of leadership. Some
genuinely want diversity but not necessarily difference, becoming less enthusiastic when faced with
challenges to their assumptions. Others know that they must rethink the traditionally masculine
picture of a leader. A consultant can approach those committee members and ask them to
reconsider when they respond negatively to a female candidate who comes across in a powerful
way or who does not display the qualities they believe represent leadership.

Assuming responsibility. Sometimes the committee just needs a little explicit direction. That's when
those overseeing the search should step up. Trustees or hiring officers intent on having difference
well represented in the finalist pool would be well advised to:

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.spot.lib.auburn.edu/ehost/delivery?sid=fd9f492c-42f5-4a61-b7a... 10/5/2017
EBSCOhost Page 4 of 4

* Consider gender and other differences when building the committee. Adding a young(ish) staff
member can make a big impact.

* Be clear that candidates with a record of affirming difference will be valued in the selection
process. Then be clear about the varied ways in which leadership can be displayed and the
expectation that a strong finalist pool will include representation of more than one approach.

* Direct the search committee to select finalists who themselves value difference.

What candidates can do.

* Think ahead of time about how you want to come across to the committee. Sit tall and don't
apologize.

* No interview starts as a blank slate. Candidates' resumes and reputations precede them, for better
or worse. Think about what the committee might ask you.

* Start strong. First impressions are critical.

* Take credit. Be ready to highlight your impact and achievements by having anecdotes at the ready.

* Show confidence and presence. Committees are thinking: "Is this the person we want leading our
institution? Would I follow this person?"

Search-committee members must recognize the effect their perceptions can have on gender
equality in leadership. If we want more women to ascend to top positions, we should make the
interview session one that is fair and aware.

~~~~~~~~
By ROBIN MAMLET

Robin Mamlet is managing partner of the education practice at the executive search firm Witt/Kieffer.

The Chronicle of Higher Education: (http://chronicle.com) 1-800-728-2803 Copyright of Chronicle of

Higher Education is the property of Chronicle of Higher Education and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.spot.lib.auburn.edu/ehost/delivery?sid=fd9f492c-42f5-4a61-b7a... 10/5/2017