How to design gender bias out of your workplace | Sara Sanford

Transcriber: Ivana Korom Reviewer: Joanna Pietrulewicz

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: SF Huang

A few years ago,

幾年前，

I had a corporate feminist dream job.

我做的是企業女權主義者 夢寐以求的工作。

Launching a company's national initiative

為一間公司推出全國計畫，

to recruit more female employees.

招募更多女性員工。

In the finance sector.

為財務部門招募。

But first, I had to get the signed-off support

但，首先我得要得到 各部門主管簽署的支持。

of all department heads.

So I spent months perfecting the proposal,

所以我花了數個月的時間 把提案修到完美，

presented it

做簡報，

and won the support of almost everyone.

贏得幾乎每個人的支持。

But in this team, there were two men we'll call Howard and Tom.

但，在這個團隊中有兩位男性， 就稱他們為霍華和湯姆。

Howard just would not get back to me.

霍華就是不回覆我。

I emailed him about the proposal,

為這份提案，我發電子郵件給他， 也在語音信箱留言，

I left him voice mails,

I'd roll my chair back and forth during meetings,

開會時我來回滑動著椅子，

trying to make eye contact with Howard.

試圖要和霍華對到眼。（笑聲）

(Laughter)

He'd just take out his phone and start scrolling.

他就只是拿出手機滑著它。

And then I started to question myself.

接著，我開始質疑我自己。

Had I been diplomatic enough in that email?

我的那封信寫得夠圓融嗎？

Too demanding in that voice mail?

留言的內容是否太苛求了？

Does Howard hate this proposal

霍華討厭這個提案嗎？

or am I just overreacting?

還是只是我反應過度？

It's probably just me, I thought.

我想，可能只是我的問題吧。

And then one day,

接著，有一天，

I'm walking down the hall and here comes Howard.

我走過大廳時碰到了霍華。

He's holding a packet of papers,

他拿著一疊紙，

sees me and lights up.

看到我時滿臉笑容。

He says,

他說：「莎菈，湯姆剛 寄給我這個，你應該看看。

"Sara, Tom just emailed this to me, you should take a look.

It's a proposal for us to recruit more women."

這是讓我們招募更多女性的提案。」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

"I think Tom has a really great idea here,

「我覺得湯姆的這個點子真的很好，

and we should all get behind it."

我們應該全力支持它。」

Howard proceeds to hand my own proposal back to me.

接著，霍華把我自己的提案交給我。

And explains to me the many merits of what I wrote.

他還向我解釋我寫的許多優點。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Howard was never against recruiting more women.

霍華從來沒有反對招募更多女性。

But he needed to hear from a man

但必需要由男性來告訴他

why it was important to hire more women.

為什麼僱用更多女性很重要。

And as this scene played out,

這場景上演時，

I said nothing.

我什麼都沒說。

Because I knew somehow that I was a guest

因為我知道，

在這個不適合我的地方， 我只是個過客。

in a place that wasn't meant for me.

And so instead of questioning my environment,

所以，我沒有去質疑我的環境，

I questioned myself.

反而是質疑我自己。

I wanted to know

我想知道，

how so many talented women who worked long hours

為何這麼多有才華的女性 長時間投入工作，

and started their careers with confidence

帶著自信開始職涯，

all became trained in this kind of self-doubt that makes them say,

卻都養成了這種 自我懷疑，導致她們會說：

"It's probably just me."

「可能只是我的問題。」

How was that still possible?

怎麼可能仍然是這樣？

Aren't things getting better?

一切不是應該好轉嗎？

Opportunities for women have increased over the last 50 years.

在過去五十年間， 女性的機會已經增加了。

But over the last decade, progress has stalled.

但在過去十年間，進展卻停滯下來。

Experts have previously identified 2059

專家先前預測到 2059 年時，

as the year the wage gap would close.

兩性的薪資差距會消失。

But in September of this year,

但今年九月，

these same experts announced that according to the most current data,

同樣這些專家宣佈， 根據最近期的資料，

we'll have to adjust our expectations

我們得把預期薪資平等的年代

to the year 2119.

往後延長到 2119 年。

(Audience murmurs)

（觀眾低語）

One hundred one years from now.

從現在起算的一百零一年之後。

Looking beyond the wage gap,

至於薪資差距之外，

women are still underrepresented in leadership,

女性領導人的比例仍然偏低，

receive less access to senior leaders

成為資深領導人的機會較少，

and are leaving the fastest-growing sectors,

且離開快速成長部門 （比如科技部門）的比率，

such as tech,

at 45 percent higher rates than men,

比男性還要高 45%，

citing culture as the primary reason.

背後主要的原因是文化。

So what have we been doing to address gender inequality?

所以，我們做了什麼 來處理性別不平等？

Why isn't it working?

為什麼沒有效果？

Many businesses think they're addressing the problem,

許多企業認它們有在處理這個問題，

because they provide training.

因為它們有提供訓練。

Eight billion dollars worth of training a year,

根據《哈佛商業評論》的研究，

企業每年提供價值 八十億美金的訓練。

according to studies from the "Harvard Business Review."

These same studies also conclude that these trainings don't work

而這些研究的結論是， 這些訓練沒有用，

and often backfire.

且還常有反效果。

Research tracking the hiring and promotion practices of 830 companies

研究追蹤了八百三十間公司

三十年間在僱用和升遷上的做法，

over the course of 30 years

found that white men who are asked to go to diversity trainings

結果發現，被要求參加 多樣性訓練的白人男性

tend to rebel

反而傾向走回頭路，

by hiring and promoting fewer women

更少僱用和提拔女性及少數族群。

and fewer minorities.

The other solution has been to ask women to change their own behavior.

另一個解決方案則是

要求女性改變她們自己的行為。

To lean in.

要去抓住機會。

To sit at the table.

要去參加飯局。

Negotiate as often as men.

和男性一樣經常協商。

Oh, and get more training.

喔，還要多參加訓練。

Women currently earn the majority of college degrees,

目前，取得大學 學位的女性多於男性，

outperform their peers in key leadership skills

她們在關鍵領導技能上 表現也超越同儕，

and are running businesses that outperform the competition.

她們所經營的企業 在競爭中也出類拔萃。

It doesn't look like education

看起來，教育、技能，

or skills or business acumen are the problem.

或生意上的精明果斷都不是問題。

We're already empowered.

我們已經有能力了。

Enough to make an impact on the businesses that are ready.

能力足以為準備好的企業帶來影響。

These approaches fail to address the key systemic problem:

這些方法都沒有能夠 處理關鍵的體制問題：

Unconscious bias.

無意識的偏見。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

We all have bias, it's OK.

我們都有偏見，那沒關係。

It's lodged in our amygdala,

杏仁核中本來就有偏見，

it keeps ticking away when we go to work.

當我們去工作時，它會不斷流逝。

Bias affects how much I like you,

偏見會影響我喜歡你的程度、

what I believe you're capable of

我相信你能力的多寡，

and even how much space I think you take up.

甚至我認為你佔據了多少空間。

Thanks in part to the Me Too movement,

有部分要感謝「Me Too」運動，

awareness of gender bias has spread.

對性別偏見的意識已被散播出去。

But the harassment stories that made headlines

但上了頭條的騷擾報導

are just one piece.

只是一小部分。

You don't have to harass a woman to limit her career.

要限制女性的職涯，不見得要騷擾她。

The messages women send me aren't about being harassed.

女性發給我的訊息 並不是關於騷擾的訊息。

They're being tolerated in the workplace.

在工作場所中，她們是被容忍的一群。

But they're not being valued.

但她們不會被重視。

I don't know anyone who has ever said,

我沒有聽過任何人說：

"You know what I love about my employer?

「你知道我為什麼這麼愛我的僱主嗎？

They just tolerate me so well,

因為他們對我好容忍喔，

I feel so tolerated."

我覺得好被寬容。」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

To break the inertia,

要打破習慣，

we need to take a step beyond Me Too.

我們必須要超越 Me Too。

Beyond just being tolerated as women.

要超越只因是女性而被容忍。

Our organization decided to tackle the problem in two ways.

我們的組織決定要用 兩種方式來處理這個問題。

First, if we're all biased,

第一，如果我們都有偏見，

our workplaces need to be actively antibiased by design,

我們在設計工作場所時 就要積極地做到反偏見，

not by trying to change mindsets one training at a time.

而不是試圖想透過一次的訓練 就來改變心態。

So our team began by identifying over 100 cultural levers

我們的團隊首先先找出 超過一百項文化特性，

that can be adjusted to counter the impact of bias.

調整這些特性就可以對付偏見的影響。

We found that small tweaks can lead to big changes.

我們發現，只需微調 就能造成大大的改變。

And they cost a lot less than eight billion dollars.

且成本遠低於八十億美金 。

So what do these small tweaks look like?

所以，這些微整是什麼呢？

If a woman is asked to state her gender

如果女性在填寫工作申請書之前

before filling out a job application,

就被要求寫出她的性別，

or performing a skills-related test,

或在進行技能相關測驗之前，

she performs worse than if she were not asked first.

那麼她的表現就會比 沒被事先問及性別時差。

So how can businesses avoid activating this self-stereotyping bias?

所以，企業要如何避免觸發 這種自我刻板化的偏見？

Move the gender check box to the end of the application.

把申請表上的性別選項移到最後。

Example two.

第二個例子。

In a national survey that we conducted,

在我們進行的一項全國調查中，

men were 50 percent more likely to state

有比女性多出 50% 的男性，

they had received multiple, frequent evaluations

表示他們在去年中

曾經頻繁地接受過多次評估。

over the course of the last year.

As opposed to one single yearly review.

而不是只做一次年度檢討。

Here's why this matters.

讓我說明為什麼這很重要。

"Fortune" magazine reviewed performance evals across industries.

《財星》雜誌探討了 不同產業的績效評估。

And found that criticism like this related to personality,

結果發現這類批評

〔「注意你的口氣！」……〕

["Watch your tone!"]

和個性相關但和工作技能無關，

but not job-related skills,

appeared in 71 of the 94 yearly reviews received by women.

在九十四份女性的年度檢討報告中 有七十一份都可以看到。

Of the 83 reviews received by men,

而在八十三份男性的檢討報告中，

personality criticism showed up twice.

只有兩份有關於個性的批評。

But in businesses that conduct much shorter, highly frequent reviews,

但在經常做短期檢討的企業中，

say, five-minute weekly evaluations

比如每週做五分鐘的檢討，

focused on specific projects,

檢討焦點放在特定的專案計畫，

the personality criticism vanishes.

相關於個性的批評就不見了。

And the perceived performance gap between men and women

且感受到的男女績效落差

is nearly nonexistent.

也幾乎不存在。

While yearly reviews rely on overall impressions,

年度檢討的基礎是整體的印象，

which are like petri dishes for bias,

這種印象就像是偏見的培養皿，

short, objectively focused evaluations

而短期、焦點客觀的評估

eliminate this feelings-based gray area.

則能消除這種以感覺 為基礎的灰色地帶。

Now, some businesses are consciously taking these steps

有些企業會有意識地採取這些步驟

to counter the impact of bias,

來對抗偏見的影響，

while others just do a good job of advertising.

其他企業只是用它來作廣告宣傳而已。

We wanted to find out who is actually getting it right.

我們想要知道誰有真正做對。

So we put a poll on Facebook,

於是我們在臉書上做了一項民調，

we asked women in workshops

我們詢問研討會的女性，

how they were choosing employers where they would be valued.

她們如何選擇會重視她們的僱主。

The most common response that we heard?

我們最常聽到的答案是什麼？

"I Google it."

「我用 Google 搜尋。」

So we googled it.

於是我們就用 Google 搜尋了。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Specifically, we googled "best employers for women in tech."

明確來說，我們搜尋

「科技業中對女性最好的僱主」。

Our results showed three completely different lists.

搜尋結果顯示了 三份完全不同的名單。

One business shows up as the top employer on one list,

有間在一份最佳僱主 名單上名列前茅的企業，

doesn't show up at all on another,

在另一份名單中卻榜上無名，

some lists offer no criteria

有些名單沒有提供評選標準，

and some are purchased ads.

有些則是用廣告買來的。

They're paid for.

付錢買來的排名。

Employees and employers both want clear benchmarks

員工和僱主都想要有清楚的基準，

that go beyond good intentions.

不只是好意圖而已。

The LEED certification gave businesses this clarity

領先能源與環境設計（LEED） 認證就提供了企業

這種關於環境管理的透明度，

around environmental stewardship

by outlining the exact steps they need to take for certification.

LEED 會描述要採取哪些 明確的步驟才能得到認證。

We wanted businesses to have this kind of playbook for gender equity.

我們希望也能給予企業 類似的性別平等指南手冊。

So for our second act,

所以，我們的第二個動作，

we took what we had learned from testing these cultural levers,

就是把測試這些文化特性 所得到的資訊拿來運用，

we partnered with the University of Washington

我們和華盛頓大學合作，

and created the first standardized certification

建立了美國企業性別平等的

for gender equity in US businesses.

第一個標準化認證。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

To create this standard,

要建立這項標準，

we had to learn what matters and what doesn't.

我們就必須要了解 什麼重要、什麼不重要。

We found out that what matters

我們發現，重要的並不是

is not the total percentage of female employees.

所有員工中女性的比例。

Or the number of board members that are female.

或者董事會中女性的比例。

Those are what we call vanity metrics.

那些是我們所謂的虛榮度量指標。

They can be bought,

花錢就能買到，

while the culture inside can still be out of balance.

但企業內部的文化仍然是不平衡的。

The factors that matter and that should be measured

重要且應該要測量的因子

are under the surface.

是在表面下的因子。

For example,

比如，

even in organizations where equal percentages of women and men

就算在一個組織中， 有同比例的男性與女性

state that they have had access to a mentor,

都說他們能夠取得導師的協助，

men's mentors are more likely to be in senior positions.

男性員工的導師 多傾向為高級位階的人。

Reviewing our survey results,

根據我們的調查結果，

men were twice as likely to state

多出女性兩倍的男性會表述

they had been offered an opportunity to shadow someone in a senior role.

自己曾有機會去跟隨著 高級位階的人學習。

We're all used to hearing about the wage gap.

我們都很常聽到薪資差距。

Hidden opportunity gaps like these are just as influential.

像這種隱藏的機會差距 也同樣有影響力。

So when assessing a company's culture,

所以，在評估公司的文化時，

we measure these gaps between men's and women's experiences.

我們會去測量這類 男女體驗之間的差距。

And the smaller the gap,

差距越小，

the more equity is center of the culture.

該文化的核心就越平等。

We also searched our findings

我們也在研究結果中 尋找工作場所文化的理念，

for the tenets of workplace culture

that are most important to men and most important to women.

看看什麼對男性最重要、 什麼對女性最重要。

We learned that only three factors consistently matter to men,

我們發現，對男性而言， 只有三個因子始終是很重要的，

while a dozen matter to women.

但對女性而言卻有十多個因子。

And they only share one in common.

兩性都重視的因子只有一個。

Topping the list for women:

女性最重視的因子是：

Paid family leave,

給薪的家務假、

health care for dependents

家屬的健保，

and feeling that their ideas are heard

以及感受到她們的想法有被聽見，

and they're properly credited for them.

且因此受到應有的重視。

These are a few of the 188 indicators

這只是其中幾個指標， 總共有一百八十八個指標

that determine whether or not an organization

用來決定組織是否符合

meets our quantitative standard for workplace equality.

我們針對工作場合平等 所設的量化標準。

Based on the data that matter.

依據重要相關的資訊所做成。

These are the factors

這些才是能創造出

to create a culture of equity that lasts.

永續性平等文化的因素。

Not just for a month or for a quarter

不是僅僅一個月或一季，

but for years.

而是數年之久。

So where does this leave us?

所以，我們該怎麼做？

Women in the workforce today are constantly told,

女性在現今的工作場合經常會聽到：

"You can be anything you want now.

「你現在就可以成為 任何你想要的樣子。

It's up to you."

由你決定。」

Women of color,

薪資差距更大的非白人女性，

for whom the wage gap is even larger,

have heard it.

聽過這句話。

The two-thirds of minimum-wage workers who are women have heard it.

三分之二領最低薪資的 女性工作者也聽過這句話。

Workers who don't identify as male or female

沒有表明性別且在工作時

and hide their identity at work

隱藏身分的工作者也聽過這句話。

have heard it.

If they can hear, "You can be anything you want now,

若他們能聽到「你現在就可以成為

任何你想要的樣子，由你決定」，

it's up to you,"

I believe it's time for our businesses to hear it, too.

那麼我相信也該是企業 聽到這句話的時候了。

Eliminating workplace bias is a tall order.

消除工作場所的偏見 是件很困難的任務。

But we can't afford to let half our people go on

但我們不能讓一半的人 繼續被忽視，

being ignored.

我們承擔不起。

We've given businesses a framework for real change.

我們已經提供企業一個 能真正做出改變的體系架構。

Businesses can be anything they want now.

現在企業可以成為 任何它們想要的樣子。

It is up to them.

由它們決定。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）