research@hec - Issue #18 - (Page II)

Anger in the Workplace Men vs. Women: Unequal in Ire? Eric Luis Uhlmann research BIOGRAPHY Eric Luis Uhlmann joined HEC Paris in September 2010. His work focuses primarily on social judgments and particularly on the fact that they are often formed intuitively and automatically, and only then justified through logical, conscious reasoning. Uhlmann is the son of Chilean immigrants and is married to a Chinese woman. His associated interest in cultural differences is what attracted him to France. He holds a PhD in social psychology from Yale University. Eric Luis Uhlmann and Victoria Brescoll's research article starts with an anecdote. In 2006, the chairman of the U.S. Republican National Committee, Adam Nagourney, declared on American television that Hillary Clinton was “too angry to be elected president.” The media had a field day with this comment. Journalist Maureen Dowd wrote in the New York Times that Clinton was being cast in the role of “the Angry Woman,” adding, “The gambit handcuffs Hillary: If she doesn't speak out strongly against President Bush, she's timid and girlie. If she does, she's a witch and a shrew.” While politicians have always maligned their opponents, this particular case raises questions about the ability of a woman who has displayed anger to win an election ... or to get ahead at work. STEREOTYPES DIE HARD Citing earlier research, Uhlmann and Brescoll show that for reasons including deeply entrenched stereotypes, there is a real difference between men and women when it comes to expressing anger. Indeed, studies have established that men who express anger at work sometimes benefit from doing so, as co-workers subsequently perceive them as more important, powerful, and independent. However, when women lose their cool, they do not benefit from such positive consequences. MARKED GENDER DIFFERENCES “People ... view a man’s anger as a response to objective, external circumstances, but a woman’s What if Segolene Royal lost the 2007 presidential election simply because she lost her temper with Nicolas Sarkozy during their debates—while Sarkozy comes to expressing anger in the workplace. simultaneously benefited from his outbursts? Research by Eric Luis Uhlmann and Victoria Brescoll shows that women and men are in fact far from equal when it hec TACTICS TO BE REFINED While these results suggest a clear tactic for men— get angry without providing any justification—things are not so simple for women. Indeed, while anger can be useful in certain situations (i.e., to get othAnger without explanation 46 000 Anger with explanation 27 000 Average salary, in euros Without anger 29 000 Men Women 32 000 21 000 34 000 anger as a product of her personality,” say Uhlmann and Brescoll. “As a result, a professional woman’s anger may imply that she is not competent at dealing with workplace situations.” According to the figures from various studies*, this leads to lesser responsibilities and lower salaries A woman’s risk of losing professional respect is all the greater because of a tendency to consider women’s behavior as linked to personality, particularly when she is seen as “out of control”. The only thing that can diminish the negative impact of a woman’s display of anger is an explanation related to external elements, such as a frustrating situation. “For men, it seems to be advantageous to get angry without providing justification,” explains Uhlmann. Men who fly off the handle without explaining why are more highly regarded, better paid, and seen as more competent than both men who show no emotion and those who attempt to explain their anger. II research@hec • December-January 2011

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of research@hec - Issue #18

Cover & Contents
Anger in the Workplace Men vs.Women: Unequal in Ire?
Renewable Energies: What Is Holding Investors Back?
Strategic Experimentation: Observing Others to Determine Behavior
Lessons fromthe April 2010 Volcanic Ash Crisis

research@hec - Issue #18