I have taken a week to think about how to blog about a session that I saw last weekend at the ABA Conference.\u00a0 The session was about using movies to demonstrate gender differences in negotiation,\u00a0and I went to see what teaching tools might be provided.\u00a0 I was on the negotiation program track for the ABA, and had helped select this session for presentation at the conference, so I was really looking forward to it.\u00a0 Instead, the session became a very good example of the challenges in teaching\u00a0about gender differences in negotiation.<\/p>\n
The session started out with slides that listed how women communicate or how women negotiate.\u00a0 I think, in retrospect, that the speakers may have been trying to\u00a0highlight some of the stereotypes about women from the 1970\u2019s and ask whether these were still relevant\u00a0but\u00a0— without any introduction to what they planned to do, cites to the outdated research, or other signposting — it appeared that the speakers were presenting these comments as current and true (even if that was not their intention).\u00a0 When asked what research this was based on, the speakers stated that \u201cthis is what the research shows. \u201d \u00a0As some in the audience continued to challenge further assertions about the research, the tone went downhill and unfortunately, rather than becoming a learning experience, became more of an argument, which continued even after the session.\u00a0 All this, of course, at a dispute resolution conference.\u00a0<\/p>\n
I wanted to unpack a few key things from this session.\u00a0 <\/p>\n
First, as presenters, academics, and scholars, it is incumbent upon each of us to know\u00a0the research in any given area on which we speak.\u00a0 One of the frustrations was that the presenters referred to \u201cresearch\u201d without differentiating as to where, how, and by whom the research was done.\u00a0 (I think it was taken primarily from an ADR textbook that they use, although I have not confirmed this.)\u00a0\u00a0 So, below, I am linking to a batch\u00a0of\u00a0the latest research on gender in negotiation.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
My second point is linked to the first.\u00a0 Like\u00a0many presentations,\u00a0this one presented a mix of research that applies to lawyers or has been done on professionals versus research done on girls.\u00a0 For example,\u00a0Carol Gilligan\u2019s work on\u00a0ten-year olds is interesting (and important and groundbreaking) AND \u00a0not as relevant in terms of giving advice to adults.\u00a0\u00a0If we are teaching in law schools (or presenting at law conferences)\u00a0with our goal being to give good negotiation advice to all of our students and\u00a0we have a very limited amount of time to talk about differences — racial, gender, ethnic, cultural, etc. — we need to make sure that our advice is pointed and useful.\u00a0\u00a0 If we start our courses, our textbooks, or our presentations with outdated and offensive stereotypes, we risk\u00a0that the inaccurate message is the only one heard.\u00a0 We end up spending the rest of our advice, or readings, or lecture then digging ourselves out of the hole we have created.\u00a0 I, for one, am done teaching Carol Gilligan as a start, then Carrie Menkel-Meadow\u2019s response (to start digging out of the hole), then other pieces, and then, finally,\u00a0my research and Charlie Craver\u2019s showing no differences.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Enough.\u00a0 Let\u2019s start with the good news — as lawyers representing clients, men negotiate just as effectively as women —\u00a0and focus on the exceptions and key questions: what can each gender learn from\u00a0the other in terms of tendencies? when do women face backlash? what are gendered contexts that make negotiation more difficult? what are the most effective strategies to avoid this?\u00a0 This is not to say that there are no gender differences or that, magically, stereotypes have disappeared.\u00a0 This is, however, a call to focus on what matters most for the future lawyers we teach.<\/p>\n
Finally, ironically, one of the pieces of advice that the presenters gave — asking a potentially sexist counterpart if he held stereotypes about women negotiating — may have\u00a0come from a misunderstanding of my own work (can\u2019t make this up!).\u00a0 Let me clarify — my 1994 article \u201cEffective Responses to Offensive Comments\u201d outlines a framework for how to respond (linked here<\/a>).\u00a0 When facing a comment that might be offensive, first the the receiver should think about her\/his own assumptions and then contemplate how to respond.\u00a0 Second, your choices to respond are ignore, confront, deflect, or engage.\u00a0 In engaging, the recipient of the comment might ask why someone said something, for example, “why did you ask me if I am the only one representing this client?”\u00a0 I would not suggest, and have never suggested, that anyone open up a negotiation by fishing for someone\u2019s biases; rather, the\u00a0choices of responses are tools to respond<\/em>, not to assert.\u00a0<\/p>\n As promised, here are some links to updated gender research.\u00a0 In addition to my articles on which I have blogged before<\/a>, there is a host of good research coming from Hannah Riley Bowles, Kathleen McGinn, Linda Babcock, Cathy Tinsley, and Debbie\u00a0Kolb.\u00a0 An SSRN search on any of them will give you\u00a0many good articles.\u00a0 Here are just a few to get started\u00a0(the first two are co-authored with me, Emily Amantullah, and Sandy Cheldelin):<\/p>\n Tinsley et al, Women at the Bargaining Table (Negotiation Journal, Nov 09)<\/a><\/p>\n Tinsley et al, Leadership and Lawyering (Hamline Symposium from AALS Annual Meeting\u00a0 of Women in the Law Section, Jan 2009)<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0Kolb, 25 Years of Gender Research (Negotiation Journal, October 09) (not on SSRN, need to find through Neg J. website)<\/p>\n Bowles, Babcock & McGinn, Constraints and Triggers: Situational Mechanics of Gender in Negotiation (Kennedy School working paper, 2005)<\/a><\/p>\n Kolb & McGinn, Beyond Gender and Negotiation to Gendered Negotiations (HBS working paper, 2008)<\/a><\/p>\n Bowles & Babcock, When Doesn\u2019t it Hurt to Ask? (IACM Working Paper, 2008)<\/a><\/p>\n