BMA eBook - Manual / Resource - Page 276
that disproportionately fall to women,
leaving them less time to develop professional relationships.
But some female leaders do establish
strong networks—and they win greater
influence and more-senior positions as a
result. What are they doing differently?
A new study sheds light on their
strategies. “I was talking with many
women about how to improve their
networks, the challenges they face,
and what they and their organizations
could do better, and I realized that all
the studies on the issue were pretty old
and narrow,” explains Inga Carboni, a
professor at William & Mary’s Mason
School of Business and the study’s
lead author. “I couldn’t answer their
questions.”
The researchers analyzed data
collected from 16,500 men and women
in more than 30 organizations across
a range of industries over the past 15
years. Then they interviewed hundreds
of female executives. This led them
to identify four characteristics that
distinguish the networking behaviors of
more-successful women from those of
their peers. In some cases those matched
the behaviors of high-performing men;
in others there were subtle but important differences.
When shaping their professional
networks, top women were:
Efficient. Studies, including the new
one, show that women generally absorb
more collaborative demands in the
workplace than their male peers do. But
the female managers with the strongest networks “recognize that every
‘yes’ means a ‘no’ to something else,”
says Babson College’s Rob Cross, one
of Carboni’s coauthors. He notes that
20
Harvard Business Review
November–December 2019
one Silicon Valley executive he knows
has adopted that idea as her mantra.
Although these successful female networkers might feel an identity-driven
desire and a stereotype-influenced
pressure to help colleagues out and be
a team player, they try to resist. They
prune nonessential appointments from
their calendars, deflect low-priority
decisions and requests, run streamlined
meetings, insist on efficient email
norms, and set aside time for reflection
and high-level thinking. At the same
time, they make the most of their
collaborative strengths and inclinations
by working with others in a way that
establishes or enhances key relationships and ups their visibility.
“At every level in organizations,
women are more likely to be sought out
for advice,” Carboni says. “And when
asked about the downsides of saying no,
every woman I interviewed said they’d
feel bad.” But she emphasizes that the
research is clear: The female executives
who rise to the top are “more strategic
and thoughtful” about how they spend
their time. Organizations can do their
part by tracking unseen collaborative
work, ensuring that it’s evenly spread
among male and female employees,
and pushing all leaders, but especially
women, to unabashedly prioritize their
most important tasks.
Nimble. The researchers’ data shows
that most women’s relationships, particularly those with female peers, are
stickier than men’s, growing stronger,
more mutual, and more interwoven
over time. Carboni and Cross note that
this can occasionally be a positive—for
example, an old contact might offer a
new opportunity or employment prospect. But if you work in a dynamic organization that requires rapid adjustments
to changing demands (and who doesn’t
nowadays?), always relying on the same
people can hurt your performance.
Successful female networks are more
fluid. High-ranking women know when
to deemphasize old connections in
favor of new ones (whether by proactively cutting ties or by simply failing
to maintain contact). For example, says
Cross, “when you’re at an inflection
point at work or are embarking on a
new project, you want to think about
your goals and who will help you reach
