We are all used to being interrupted in the meetings. Depending on the personality and the communication style some of us are more often the interrupter than the interruptee. But several studies indicate that also gender plays a role. The researchers looked into the gender dynamics of communication in the professional world. The result is not surprising, especially to women working in a male dominated domains.
According to a paper published in the Journal of Language and Social Psychology men interrupt women 23% more often than they interrupt other men, while women interrupt other women 64% more often than men. Therefore it is important to note not only who is talking but also to whom. In total a woman is almost twice as likely to be interrupted while speaking than a man is.
A study conducted at Princeton University analysed the time occupied by the genders during conference meetings. It indicates that men dominate 75% of the conversation. Furthermore, according to Joanna Wolfe conducting related research at Carnegie Mellon University, if women stand up for their rights in such situations they are being negatively perceived by their male peers. This phenomenon is called “social penalty” for women who assert themselves when being ignored or talked over.
Confirmed by scientific studies, women have it harder to be heard in a professional world. Even in decision making panels which are gender balanced through women quotas, it has to be questioned how equal the gender representation really is given that women can’t voice their opinions to the same extent as male participants can.
In order to change such gendered communication culture it is important to raise awareness about the issue. The technology can be used to help in this process.
A Brazilian non-profit organisation “Woman Interrupted” developed an app which monitors the interruptions in a conversation. If used during a meeting the application recognises between male and female voices based on different voice frequencies and counts the number of interruptions, presenting a too often crashing result at the end.
A similar voice frequency recognition concept has been used by Swedish developers and authors of the app “Time To Talk”. If used during the meeting it measures the time spent talking by either male or female speakers and presents the statistics at the end of the meeting. Both apps are available online free of charge.
Placing your mobile phone on the meeting table and announcing that the speaking time and interruptions will be monitored might not always be met with acceptance. It strongly depends on the organisational culture, how inclusive and progressive it is. Even just suggesting the use of such a tool is provocative. But provocative measures are excellent for raising awareness which is exactly the point. The research indicates also that men participating in the studies were surprised when confronted with the video of themselves interrupting or talking over. Such behaviour is often unconsciously conditioned. By pointing the finger at the meeting dominators and impolite interrupters we should achieve in the long term that women will also have a say. Literally.