Outline Example
Opening-A quick musical jingle
Introduction-A monologue style introduction introducing your hosts and what you will talk about on your show
Segway-Could be musical or a sound effect
Topic 1:Talk for about 4 minutes
Vocal Segway–"We are going to move on and talk about…"
Topic 2: Talk for about 4 minutes
Musical segway
Topic 3: Talk for about 4 minutes
Closing remarks, thank the audience, guests, what will be on the next show
Closing musical Jingle
Rough Script Example
Opening musical jingle: First 30 seconds of Crazy Train by Ozzy Osbourne
P1: Hi welcome to the great Management 326 Podcast. I am Jake Naydock, and with me today are Lucas Johnson, Charles Wnoucek, and Zach Zhao. We have a great show for you today. Today we are going to talk about the history of women and minorities in leadership positions, bring in our guest speaker Shane Gill to give their perspective on the issue, and give an analysis and recommendations on how to tackle this problem.
Sound Effect 1-Whistle
Topic 1 – History
P1: So to begin, there is a long history of debate on the issue of minorities and women in leadership positions. Only 4% of CEOs from Fortune 500 companies are women, and whites remain at 86.7% of board seats while minorities are underrepresented.
P2: The 4% number is surprising considering that women make up 50.8% of the US population.
P3: Yeah and statistics show that more than half of all college students in the U.S., about 57 percent, are female. The male-female income gap is tightening. Women hold about 20 percent of the seats in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives– the highest proportion ever. Three of the last five Secretaries of State were women. Equality of the sexes has long been a goal, and in many ways that goal is being met. But, as you’ll hear on this program, the variance between men and women on some dimensions is still large. In other words: women are not men. (http://freakonomics.com/2014/03/20/women-are-not-men-full-transcript-2/)
P4: This disparity between men and women in leadership positions isn’t to say that there haven’t already been great strides to reduce it. In 1965, 39% of women ages 16 and older were in the labor force. That share rose steadily and peaked at 60% in 1999. As of November 2014, 57% of women were in the labor force, only 12 percentage points lower than the share for men (69%). Women account for about half of the U.S. labor force (47% in November 2014).
P1: To add to that, in 2013, over half of managerial and professional occupations (52.2%) were held by women, up from 30.6% in 1968. But the key here is that only middle management is growing, while the level of women at top positions has been steadily low.
P3: Just to give a short insight into the current situation in Germany, only 8.2% of the CEOs in the top 200 firms are female (in 2006 it was only at 1.2%) but in the largest 30 firms the percentage is a bit higher at 11.3%. 50.6% of all graduates are female but only 23.4% of all professors are female. In 2016 only 36.5% of all representatives in the Bundestag are female. So the overall situation of having women in leadership positions might be a few percentages better than in the US, but nevertheless it is still a focal point of political parties and society to lift these percentages up. In order to help women to have a higher percentage in leadership positions politics implemented a quota of 30% of women that have to be hired for any new job opening on the supervisory board of every publicly listed and codetermined company in Germany (which is about 100 companies). (Codetermined means that employees have to right to send representatives onto the supervisory board.) About 3500 other companies must set an individual goal of a higher percentage of women in all higher management and leadership positions. This law actually helped the percentage of women on the supervisory board. Even in the short time the law has been in place, between beginning of 2016 and march 2017, the percentage of women on the supervisory board went up from 25% to 28.1%. And recently the labour party announced the law in place doesn’t go far enough, they want to implement a new law aimed at a quota for women on the executive board.
(https://de.statista.com/themen/873/frauenquote/;https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2016/07/PD16_245_213.html;https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article169078778/Diese-Fraktionen-haben-den-geringsten-Frauenanteil.html;https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article165961003/SPD-droht-mit-Ausweitung-der-Frauenquote.html)
P2: The question is: What is causing this phenomenon? Many say that the gap has to do with the inherent traits between men and women. Just some background; 155 countries have at least one law that limits women’s economic opportunities. 100 states put restrictions on the types of jobs women can do; and 18 countries allow husbands to dictate whether their wives can work at all. (https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/dec/08/why-are-there-so-few-women-in-power-transcript)
P3: For one, men and women seem to value different traits in a leader. Women are much more likely than men to say that being compassionate is absolutely essential in a leader: 66% of women say this, compared with 47% of men. Women also place a higher value on innovation than men do. Some 61% of women consider this trait to be absolutely essential in a leader, compared with 51% of men.
P4: For many women getting into the workplace is just the first of many steps. According to UN Women’s flagship report published in April, globally women earn an average 24% less than men, work more hours, and have less chance of receiving a pension in later life.
P1: Diversity, I think, is something that can be positive, right, but it can also be challenging to think about. How do we cooperate across difference? How do we think about our common interests to move toward achieving a common goal? How do we get at the root cause of these inequalities, and can we? How do we approach this question of finding the root of an equality?
P2: Wow you are right, all of these questions pose a great well thought out point. This inequality gap between gender and race will never truly disappear. Every study shows different statistics that honestly favor a political agenda rather than focusing on the point blank facts. We as the people need to stand up for equality for all in the workplace.
P3: Yeah you are right but you can think also about the ways in which inequality is produced and reproduced in interpersonal interaction. So, we know, for example, that there’s a status hierarchy, and that influences our expectations for other people. We all know the ways that we're supposed to behave according to where we fall into the relative status hierarchy in any given setting, so we're supposed to behave in deferential manner to people who are higher in the status hierarchy than we are.
P4: We also know how we expect people to behave based on their socioeconomic position, or their gender or their race, and we reinforce those differences in our interactions with them. And typically, it’s out of that sense of difference or otherness that we start to run into situations where there's stigma, prejudice, discrimination, attached to certain categories or certain groups of people in the population. So, and then what happens is that people start to integrate those understandings of status and of different into their sense of self.
P1: True but nobody goes into the room and says, I'm not going to pay attention to that person because they're from a different group than I am. These are just things that we learn how to do, that we do unconsciously without meaning to.
P2: It is important to understand that as a human, we are construction workers of our own lives. We constantly are learning new things and acting on our past findings.
P3: How about we take step back and look at an in depth analysis of the controversial topic at hand?
P4: I agree, let’s take a step back to get a clearer picture!
Topic 2 – Analysis
P1: Now we’re going to go into our analysis of this issue, beginning with the ways that men and women perceive our differences.
P2: According to Pew research, the public says that they do not perceive any differences between men and women leaders.
P3: But if that is the case, then wouldn’t the numbers of men and women leaders be similar, if not identical?
P4: The numbers should be similar based on public perception, but in the same Pew research study the public reported that they perceived men having a better shot at leadership positions than women
P1: And these differences are evident when looking at minorities as well. It poses the question: What causes these differences? One report on ethnic minorities in leadership positions hypothesizes that the long history of intergenerational trauma seems to unconsciously shape the way ethnic minority leaders view and interact with the world; These experiences help to create a leadership style that is genuine and participatory in nature, with clearly defined goals and objectives.
P2: So what this means is that there is a clear difference between the leadership styles of white and ethnic leaders. It has been found that minority leaders have a positive impact on those that they lead, specifically in regard to the interpersonal skills used to communicate and interact with subordinates.
P3: One of the positive aspects that minorities bring to the workplace is the fact that they are less likely to use oppressive measures than white managers. The reason is that they are believed to have a high awareness of social justice, something that white managers aren’t as conditioned to have.
P4: In fact, black managers are ranked significantly higher than white supervisors on three out of the 4 managerial leadership measures: managerial support, work facilitation, and goal emphasis. This means that they lead people in a way that creates more support and help for their subordinates, they help them stay more focused on tasks, and actually work to remove obstacles that get in the way of completing a job. These traits are in line with transformational leaders, who characteristically care more for their subordinates. Transformational leaders are often valued highly in recent years as companies are starting to realize the importance of delegation.
P1: By contrast, white leaders are more transactional in style. This means that they are more concerned about bottom lines than development of their employees. This system is based much more on rewards and punishment for subordinates and by nature is less empathetic.
P2: So this research investigation ultimately pointed out that the reasons for minorities’ more caring leadership style is because they are in a position where they have to “prove themselves”. Because of the stereotypes they often have to put up with that hinder their advancement, they stay more grounded and affirming to their subordinates.
P3: And with similarly low numbers of females in leadership positions, it could be possible that women are facing some of the same societal problems that minorities are, that may be preventing their advancement in the workplace.
P4: Absolutely, and one academic journal from the University of Louisiana theorized that the reason for the disparity between men and women in leadership positions is the existence of barriers that they face. When they encounter these barriers to success, they often give up on advancing to the highest level after they realize that the systems in place are preventing them from moving up in an organization the same way a man can.
P1: The journal goes on to say that the culprit for this phenomenon is the gender gap, which can be defined by the discrepancy in opportunities, status, attitudes, etc., between men and women. While most agree about the gender gap’s existence, there are several models that can be used to explain why it exists.
P2: One of these models is the Individual or Meritocracy model. This model actually pinpoints the cause of the gender gap to women themselves. Under this viewpoint, women aren’t assertive enough, are unwilling to work the system, and lack self-confidence. They just don’t seem to have the same hunger for power that men have, which is why they don’t push their way to the top of companies.
P3: But this paper makes an interesting point in arguing that women’s lack of a desire for power is actually just mistaken for the way that women perceive power differently from men. Men tend to look at power as a finite resource, and try to claim as much as they can for themselves. Women don’t have this fixed-pie view of power. They view power as an infinite resource, one that actually grows as it is shared.
P4: Another model called the Organizational or Discrimination model tries to address the source of the gender gap by placing emphasis on institutions, particularly educational systems that don’t provide the same opportunities for women as they do for men. This results in different career aspirations and subsequently lower levels of success. This model also holds that men advance to higher positions because they are favored in promotional practices, and that in many cases women don’t have the chance to advance even if they want to.
P1: The third model that provides explanation of the gender gap is the Place or Social model, that looks to cultural and social norms for the reason why women can’t seem to ascend to higher leadership positions. These norms lead to different socialization patterns for women and men, and these patterns are what encourage the discriminatory practices of companies that “hold women in their place”
P2: Regardless of what the real answer is, it’s clear that this gap exists and it’s problematic for the business world because much like minorities, women have different leadership styles from men that are being underutilized.
P3: One of the fundamental differences between the leadership styles of men and women is where their focus is. Men tend to stay fixated on the final product, and they stress task accomplishment in order to reach that final product or goal. Women, on the other hand, take on a more facilitative and instructional. This means that they place their focus on the process, and not the product.
P4: Similarly to minority leaders, women also are much more caring and compassionate for their coworkers and subordinates than men. Instead of only trying to accomplish a goal, the focus is more on the development of the team that’s working on that goal to ensure everyone is actively participating.
P1: So by now it’s obvious that different races and genders lead in different ways. But it’s important to note that there is no right leadership style. Men’s transactional leadership style can be effective in high pressure environments. For example, a company that is underperforming can bring in a transactional CEO that emphasizes quick results and can make the company profitable as soon as possible.
P2: But the disparity becomes especially problematic when you think about all of the companies out there that could benefit from the different leadership approaches that women and minorities have to offer. Changing the pool of CEOs of major companies to become more diverse could have immense benefits for the American economy. We need to figure out ways to reduce this gap and ensure that there is an even playing field for leaders.
P*: So this just came out the news, former president Obama also shared some thoughts on this topic. More women need to be put in positions of power. Obama said and I quote"Not to generalize but women seem to have a better capacity than men do, partly because of their socialization,"
P*: Very interesting, so are we saying women make better leaders?
P*: That may very well be, the news article also talked about a study of 51418 leaders in the US and overseas, and they found that women are considered more effective than male leaders.
(https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/04/barack-obama-says-women-make-better-leaders-and-data-shows-hes-right.html)
Topic 3 – Recommendations
P3: Let’s start to talk about some of the ways that this problem can be addressed. There are already plenty of recommendations out there from a variety of sources that may be helpful in narrowing the gap between white men and women and minorities.
P4: One relevant recommendation is one that we learned in the course: Keep it Anonymous. In studies women and minorities with identical resumes saw higher rejection rates than white men, simply because of the name associated with the resume.
P1: Although most people would not say that they would discriminate on the basis of race or gender, in this case it’s more likely the result of unconscious biases that exist in most people. Simply looking at a name can unknowingly cause someone to reject an applicant that is well qualified for a position, because of the unconscious associations that appear in our minds.
P2: This unconscious bias is really hard to prevent, and it’s not something that you can just tell people to avoid and the problem is solved. The best way to prevent this unconscious bias from happening is to never give it a chance in the first place.
P3: In hiring and application processes, resumes should be kept anonymous and should instead of corresponding numbers that will allow the association with their name to happen after a hiring decision is made. If there is no name attached, then it will be ensured that people are hired solely on their qualifications and not something as arbitrary as their name.
P4: This recommendation may not be a direct solution to the problem of few minority and women CEOs, but it will help more of them get into the organizations where they can eventually become leaders. Giving everyone the same opportunity to progress in their careers is an important first step in evening the playing field of CEOs and top leaders. This should become a standard for companies to abide by to ensure that their hiring practices are ethical.
P1: Another recommendation that could be beneficial to both women and minorities is mentoring. Often times both demographics lack role models in their lives who can set a leadership example for them. By creating mentoring programs, companies can develop these employees to become great leaders.
P2: It’s important to add for this recommendation that these mentoring programs should include mentors from the same demographic as the mentee, a woman should have a woman mentor. Looking up to someone who is similar is crucial for someone who has the potential to lead, as that wisdom can be passed down and they can learn how to become successful under their circumstances.
P3: If mentoring programs for marginalized groups become commonplace, it will influence the next generation of upper managers and have an enormous impact on the disparity we see in CEOs of major companies. Better yet, it can save companies money. Mentoring younger workers will decrease turnover, as it will help them become better accustomed to their work environment. These mentor programs will also lead to better individual performance, and therefore better company performance since women and minorities tend to be transformational leaders that use their expertise to develop the talent of their coworkers.
P4: These initiatives would probably be beneficial in creating more women and minority leaders, but there is also research out there that suggests that women and minorities themselves can do something to change the white-male dominated leadership norm. We’ve found a list of “survival skills” for women that want to advance to leadership positions, created by researchers on this topic. Although it was designed with women in mind, it can definitely be applied to minorities as well.
P1: This list starts out with emphasizing the importance of planning for a successful career path. Planning is a skill is important for all workers: this is the hard work, dedication, and putting in long hours that comes along with being an exceptional employee. This must come first and foremost.
P2: The next skill is realizing that competition does exist. If women want to be promoted, part of the challenge is accepting that they will have to exhibit the same behaviors and skills that are needed to compete. Women (and minorities) should realize that to advance they need to be sure that their performance is in line with or exceeding the rest of the competition.
P3: The next two skills go hand in hand: The ability to keep going and develop confidence, and possessing the courage and determination to battle the white male dominated establishment. As we talked about earlier, many women and minorities find the barriers to leadership insurmountable and so they eventually just give up all hope of ever reaching their goals. Even though it may be harder for women and minorities to work up to the top of an organization, it’s important for them to stay persistent in their efforts because the norm will not change unless they keep trying.
P4: The list goes on to talk about the importance of delegation and meeting deadlines, but the important last step of this survival list is to exercise the managerial role. The aim of a leader should be to gain respect, not love. With women often being associated with a certain maternal quality, people oftentimes have a difficult time reconciling their empathetic and caring qualities with the respect they deserve as leaders. Women need to pay extra attention to the way their power is received, and need to exercise their power in a way that gains them respect if their end goal is a leadership position.
P1: Another strategy that both women and minorities can use is to look at gender and race differences positively. Instead of a thought process like “I’m not a good fit here because I’m different” or “I won’t be able to advance in this organization because of these differences”, it’s important to view it from a different lense. A better way to look at it could be “What new information could I bring to the table because I am different from the norm?”.
P2: One thing is for sure: the differences should not be ignored between white men, minorities, and women. These differences should actually be embraced and discussed. As we mentioned earlier, different cultural backgrounds and demographics correspond to different styles of leadership. There’s no right or wrong, but one style could be better than another depending on the specifics. Women and minorities should be shifting their focus to what positive benefits could come from these differences, instead of how they are being held back by them.
P3: And it’s all of our jobs to see these benefits for what they are. Keeping a white male dominated culture for CEOs is a thing of the past, and as the United States becomes a more culturally diverse place, corporations should follow suit. If the corporate environment can change so that everyone has the same opportunities to advance to high levels of leadership, then I think in the near future we’re going to see a very ethnically and gender diverse group of Fortune 500 CEOs.
Closing remarks, thank the audience, guests, what will be on the next show