Workplace Trends

I was shadowing a coaching client in her leadership meeting when I watched this brilliant woman apologize six times in 30 minutes. 1. “Sorry, this might be off-topic, but..." 2. “I'm could be wrong, but what if we..." 3. “Sorry again, I know we're running short on time..." 4. “I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but..." 5. “This is just my opinion, but..." 6. “Sorry if I'm being too pushy..." Her ideas? They were game-changing. Every single one. Here's what I've learned after decades of coaching women leaders: Women are masterful at reading the room and keeping everyone comfortable. It's a superpower. But when we consistently prioritize others' comfort over our own voice, we rob ourselves, and our teams, of our full contribution. The alternative isn't to become aggressive or dismissive. It's to practice “gracious assertion": • Replace "Sorry to interrupt" with "I'd like to add to that" • Replace "This might be stupid, but..." with "Here's another perspective" • Replace "I hope this makes sense" with "Let me know what questions you have" • Replace "I don't want to step on toes" with "I have a different approach" • Replace "This is just my opinion" with "Based on my experience" • Replace "Sorry if I'm being pushy" with "I feel strongly about this because" But how do you know if you're hitting the right note? Ask yourself these three questions: • Am I stating my needs clearly while respecting others' perspectives? (Assertive) • Am I dismissing others' input or bulldozing through objections? (Aggressive) • Am I hinting at what I want instead of directly asking for it? (Passive-aggressive) You can be considerate AND confident. You can make space for others AND take up space yourself. Your comfort matters too. Your voice matters too. Your ideas matter too. And most importantly, YOU matter. @she.shines.inc #Womenleaders #Confidence #selfadvocacy

A Time to Reflect on the Tensions Between Growth and Sustainability #NYCW Next week, world leaders and industry giants will gather for New York Climate Week, ready to discuss collaboration to tackle the climate crisis. It’s a promising step, right? But here’s the twist: this all happens in a country that champions a capitalist economy—one that demands perpetual growth and profits. Can we really expect a system designed for “more, more, more” to suddenly protect the planet and its people? On one hand, development fuels progress, and progress is rooted in growth. On the other hand, that very pursuit of growth undermines sustainability. How can we reconcile this? Take maritime decarbonization: we’re focused on alternative fuels to cut emissions. But maybe the real solution lies in reducing global trade itself. Fewer ships, fewer emissions. Can we embrace that reality in a globalized world? Perhaps it’s time to rethink sustainability altogether. Instead of focusing solely on economic growth, we need to re-balance our approach, placing environmental sustainability on equal footing. Just as governments and regulators have propped up the economy, we need that same commitment to protect our ecosystems. Without environmental checks and balances, does a capitalist economy really set us up for a sustainable future? As we head into Climate Week, it’s worth critically evaluating the very foundations of our assumptions. Are we ready for real change—or are we simply polishing the surface of a flawed system?

Equal Pay Day moved BACKWARD in 2025 to March 25th, revealing a harsh truth: transparency without enforcement doesn't create equality. 60% of job postings now include salary information—up from just 18% in 2020—yet women still earn just 85 cents to a man's dollar. Even more disturbing? The gap is widening. Of 98 countries with equal pay laws, only 35 have implemented any accountability mechanisms. We're seeing the illusion of progress without the substance. True salary transparency requires action at every level: For individuals: - Share your salary information with "trusted" colleagues - Explicitly ask for pay ranges before interviews - Document salary discussions and decisions - Normalize compensation conversations in your workplace - Research industry standards using sites like Glassdoor and Payscale For managers: - Conduct regular pay equity audits in your teams - Establish clear compensation criteria based on skills and responsibilities - Remove salary history questions from your hiring process - Advocate for transparent promotion pathways For organizations: - Implement formal pay bands with clear progression criteria - Regularly publish company-wide gender and racial pay gap data - Create accountability mechanisms for addressing inequities - Train managers on recognizing and addressing unconscious bias in compensation decisions The data is clear: companies with meaningful transparency see pay gaps narrow significantly in the first year alone. But posting a salary range isn't enough if there's no accountability behind it. Let's move beyond performative transparency toward meaningful equity. Please share this post if you think salary transparency should come with real action. Joshua Miller #SalaryTransparency #PayEquity #Workplace

When Moms First was starting out, a lot of people asked me: Why moms? Why not all parents? This is why: https://lnkd.in/eh3gqwPm ------ "This month, the U.S. Census Bureau published a bombshell finding: The gender wage gap just got wider for the first time in two decades ‒ with women now earning just 83 cents to a man’s dollar. That’s maddening. But, for moms at least, it’s hardly surprising. It’s next to impossible to balance work and family in this country ‒ and as this new data shows, women are taking the hit. As the cost of child care continues to soar, women will just keep falling further behind. On paper, there’s no reason to believe that women should be earning less than men. Girls are more likely to graduate from high school and more likely to hold a bachelor’s degree. More women than men go to law school and medical school, and women’s enrollment in MBA programs has reached record highs. In fact, women do earn nearly as much as men ‒ at least early in their careers. On average, women in their late 20s and early 30s are much closer to parity, taking home at least 90 cents on the dollar compared with the guys sitting next to them at graduation or new hire orientation. Then, when women hit their mid-30s, something changes. The pay gap gets wider. It’s no coincidence that that’s precisely when women are most likely to be raising kids. All of a sudden, women are forced to make very hard choices to manage the demands of work and family. As the founder of Moms First, I’ve heard versions of this story from more women than I can count. Maybe mom drops down to part-time so she can make it to school pickup. Or maybe she switches to a new job that pays less but offers more flexible hours. Or maybe she drops out of the workforce entirely, because the cost of day care would have outpaced her salary anyway. Make no mistake, we are talking about moms here. When women are paid less than men anyway (and, in the case of Black and Hispanic women, way less), deprioritizing their careers can feel like the only logical decision, even if it isn’t what they wanted. This creates a vicious cycle, where pay inequity begets more pay inequity ‒ and women are systematically excluded from economic opportunities. At the same time, while women experience a motherhood penalty, men experience a fatherhood premium ‒ working more hours and reaping bigger rewards than those without kids. As Nobel laureate Claudia Goldin put it, when describing her pioneering research on the pay gap, 'Women often step back, and the men in their lives step forward.' Because here’s the thing: The 'choice' to step back from the workforce isn’t much of a choice at all. If grandma isn’t around to pitch in and child care costs more than rent, what other option do you have?"

Last quarter I received a perfect cold email. It followed the same simple prospecting framework I teach. Here's a line-by-line breakdown of why it works so well: SUBJECT LINE: Make it all about them and reference your research Why it works: Shows that it's not spam or automated, and creates curiosity to open the e-mail and here what they have to say PARAGRAPH #1: Warm, personal, with a sincere compliment Why it works: Shows the prospect you took the time to learn about them, and humanizes you. PARAGRAPH #2: Share relevant observations based on research and a potential problem which their research uncovered Why it works: Shows that you are reaching out to identify a potential way to help them which they may not be thinking about PARAGRAPH #3: Shares specific, clear value proposition which includes the problem you solve and the outcomes you deliver Why it works: people need to clearly understand what you do so they can decide for themselves if it makes sense to meet with you. Sharing generic outcomes without being direct or specific confuses and annoys prospects because they still don't know what you do after reading the e-mail. PARAGRAPH #4: Soft Call to Interest (CTI): Ask if they have ever given thought to what you wrote, and if they're open to discussing further. Why it works: Never assume that a prospect needs what you are selling. Instead, confirm whether they've thought about the problem you solve and are open to discussing further. A call to interest (CTI) is much softer than a call to action (CTA), such as asking them to meet before you've confirmed they even have a need or interest. Don't assume anything, just ask and validate first. Kudos to the seller for sending a well-written, thoughtful e-mail.

You know it. I know it. Return to office isn't neutral. It disproportionately impacts women, especially mothers and caregivers. I was honored to share my thoughts with Taylor Telford for her latest The Washington Post piece exploring how aggressive RTO policies are pushing women's progress backwards. (Link in comments) As I shared in this piece, it is not a "choice" when the options are so limited. Women are once again finding themselves pushed out of the paid workforce. Some key takeaways from the article: 👉 After decades of gradual progress, the gender wage gap is widening again. In 2024, women earned just 80.9 cents for every dollar earned by men, dropping from 84 cents in 2022. 👉 For many women, especially those with caregiving responsibilities, rigid office policies are forcing "choices": accept demotions, take pay cuts, or leave entirely. 👉 Turnover among women at companies with strict in-office mandates is nearly THREE TIMES that of men. 👉 The lack of affordable, accessible childcare continues to widen the pay gap. 👉 Policies like RTO and limiting flexibility are stagnating women who feel forced to step off the ladder towards career growth to manage caregiving. This is exactly why at WRK/360, our mission is to help workplaces ACTUALLY be family and caregiving friendly. Not just in rhetoric, but in policy, culture, and practice. The dynamics the article highlights aren’t hypothetical; they are the exact challenges we work with our clients on daily. ✔️ We help companies design policies (e.g., hybrid, flexible schedules, core hours) that allow for collaboration without penalizing caregivers ✔️We coach leadership on equitable performance criteria so that remote or hybrid contributors are not implicitly devalued ✔️We partner with organizations to embed family-supportive programs that retain talent. HR and leadership teams: 👉 Still considering an RTO mandate? Think about what this really means for women and caregivers. 👉 Already have one in place? Run an audit on your turnover. How has this policy impacted men vs. women? Caregivers vs. non-caregivers? What talent are you losing? Together, we can protect the progress made over decades and stop pushing women and caregivers out of the paid workforce.

The World Economic Forum, in partnership with LinkedIn, has just released a new whitepaper titled "Gender Parity in the Intelligent Age: 2025". This report highlights the critical role that gender parity plays in shaping the future of #work in an #AI-driven world. As we navigate the complexities of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, this research underscores the importance of closing the #gender gap in tech and leadership positions, ensuring that women are equally represented and empowered in shaping the future of innovation. Key takeaways include: * The urgent need to increase women's participation in tech and STEM fields. * Strategies to promote gender equality in digital #skills development. * How organizations can bridge the gender divide in leadership roles. We must act now to ensure that women are not left behind in the intelligent age. Great work by Silja Baller, Yanjun G. and Kim Piaget. Read the full report here: https://lnkd.in/etXCVvEN

Prof. Claudia Goldin made history by becoming the first woman to win a solo Nobel Prize in Economics. She was recognized for her ground-breaking work on the key drivers behind gender differences in the labour market. Goldin’s work shows that although historical factors such as disparities in education have narrowed in modern times, the earnings gap between men and women remains.   One reason for this is a lack of opportunities. This is where behavioural science may be able to help by identifying implicit biases and engineering a choice architecture to help tackle them.   Acknowledging the difficulty in proving that discrimination on the basis of gender in the workforce exists, Goldin and her colleagues at Harvard University turned their attention to one occupation which attempted to combat gender-biased hiring – musicians.   Before 1980, none of the “Big 5” symphony orchestras in the U.S. contained more than 12% female musicians due to both implicit and explicit biases in the hiring process. To combat these, orchestras began implementing “blind” auditions – that is, the candidate performed behind a screen so that the committee could not identify them as male or female.   This helped a little, but less than expected until they added a carpet.   What?   It turned out that the committee could hear the click of women’s shoes as they walked on stage and even that was sufficient to bias their decisions!   Analyzing data from 11 orchestras who implemented these changes revealed some shocking statistics. By hiding the identity of the musician in the audition, there was a 50% increased likelihood of a female musician progressing to the next round of auditions.   Goldin further estimated that blind auditions accounted for about 25% of the increase in the number of female orchestra musicians from 1970 to 1996. (Other factors like training more female musicians also contributed to this growth).   So, what does this teach us? 👉 Being blind to the #gender (as well as to other things like race) can improve impartiality in #hiring 👉 Biases are persistent and creep into decision making through the smallest of gaps (e.g. no carpet!) 👉 A carefully designed choice architecture can help to mitigate hiring biases and enhance #equity in the workplace Do you know of other innovative ways organisations are changing hiring processes to be as unbiased as possible?   #DiversityAndInclusion

Black women lost 91% of all women’s jobs in April. But that number isn’t the whole story — it’s just the tip of the truth. Here’s what’s “under the hood”: 1. This isn’t a fluke. It’s design. We’re overrepresented in jobs labeled essential during crisis and expendable during recovery. Admin, healthcare support, education, retail — sectors that get cut first and protect last. This is occupational segregation, and it’s doing exactly what it was built to do. 2. We were already leaking out of the pipeline. Let’s not pretend this started in April. We’ve been underpromoted, underpaid, and undersponsored — despite being the most educated demographic in the country. So when layoffs come, we aren’t just losing jobs. We’re losing hard-won ground. 3. Post-2020 performative #DEI is dead — and we’re the collateral. Many of us were hired into DEI roles or “diversity-friendly” spaces when companies wanted good press. Now, as backlash builds and budgets shrink, we’re first on the chopping block — again. This is what happens when #equity is cosmetic. 4. The economic damage is generational. 91% job loss isn’t just a stat. It’s a ripple: • Mortgage denials • Career derailment • College fund delays • Entrepreneurship on pause • Healthcare gaps This hits families, not just individuals. 5. Stop calling this a resilience issue. Resilience isn’t a fix for economic exploitation. We are not interested in masking systemic harm with individual hustle. So no, this isn’t just about job loss. It’s about power. It’s about who gets to stay. It’s about who gets protected — and who gets the short end of the stick just for taking up space. Black women are architecting a strategy that doesn’t require permission. Black women are pivoting on purpose, rebranding without code-switching, and rising without waiting for rescue. If this shook you, good. If it lit a fire under you, even better. Now let’s build something they can’t lay off. #RebrandAndRise #CareerNomadNoir #BlackWomenAtWork #StillEmployedStillAfraid #RNA #Layoffs #WorkplaceTruths #StopTheErasure #PowerToPivot #LinkedInNews LinkedIn News #hellomonday #officehours Source: Black Enterprise Magazine, May 2025 Jeffrey McKinney https://lnkd.in/eCMzUd8K