Placeholder Content Image

Lookism: beauty still trumps brains in too many workplaces

<p>Universities position themselves as places where brains matter. It seems strange then that students at a US university would rate attractive academics to be better teachers. This <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/attractive-female-academics-rated-better-teachers">was the finding</a> of a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775719307538?dgcid=coauthor">recent paper</a> from the University of Memphis, which concluded that female academics suffered most from this.</p> <p>It raises an uncomfortable proposition, that beauty trumps brains even in 21st century workplaces. It would certainly be supported by veteran female broadcasters <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/sep/22/bbc-subjects-older-women-to-lookism-says-libby-purves">such as</a> radio presenter Libby Purves, who recently complained about the way the BBC dispenses with women of a certain age.</p> <p><a href="https://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/news/articles/quarter-of-women-asked-to-dress-more-provocatively-for-video-meetings">Another survey</a>, this time in the UK, gave a deeper sense of the problem. It reported that employers were asking female employees to dress “sexier” and wear make-up during video meetings.</p> <p>Published by law firm Slater and Gordon over the summer, and based on a poll of 2,000 office-based staff working from home during lockdown, the report found that 35% of women had experienced at least one sexist demand from their employer, usually relating to how they dressed for video meetings. Women also reported being asked to wear more makeup, do something to their hair or dress more provocatively. Reasons offered by their bosses were that it would “help win business” and be “pleasing to a client”.</p> <p>It seems as though the shift to more virtual working has not eradicated what Danielle Parsons, an employment lawyer at Slater and Gordon, described as “archaic behaviour” which “has no place in the modern working world”. When employees’ performance is judged on the basis of their physical appearance, potentially shaping their pay and prospects in work, it is known as lookism. It’s not illegal, but arguably it should be.</p> <h2>Beauty and the boss</h2> <p>The Slater and Gordon survey findings affirm that many trends that we describe in our recent book, <a href="https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/aesthetic-labour/book232313">Aesthetic Labour</a>, are widespread and continuing despite remote working. Our book reports over 20 years of research and thinking about this problem. Although our research started by focusing on frontline work in hospitality and retail, the same issue has expanded into a diverse range of roles including academics, traffic wardens, recruitment consultants, interpreters, TV news anchors and circus acrobats.</p> <p>Companies think that paying greater attention to employees’ appearance will make them more competitive, while public sector organisations think it will make them more liked. As a result, they are all becoming ever more prescriptive in telling employees how they should look, dress and talk.</p> <p>It happens both to men and women, though more often to women, and is often tied in more broadly with sexualising them at work. For example, while Slater and Gordon found that one-third of men and women had “put up with” comments about their appearance during video calls, women were much likelier to face degrading requests to appear sexier.</p> <p>When we analysed ten years of employees’ complaints about lookism to the Equal Opportunities Commission in Australia, we found that the proportion from men was rising across sectors but that two-thirds of complaints were still from women. Interestingly, the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775719307538?dgcid=coauthor">University of Memphis study</a> found no correlation for male academics between how their looks were perceived and how their performance was rated.</p> <h2>Society’s obsession</h2> <p>Of course, workplaces cannot be divorced from society in general, and within the book we chart the increasing obsession with appearance. This aestheticisation of individuals is partly driven by the ever-growing reach and importance of the beauty industry and a huge rise in cosmetic – now increasingly labelled aesthetic – surgery.</p> <p>These trends are perhaps understandable given that those deemed to be “attractive” benefit from a “beauty premium” whereby they are more likely to get a job, more likely to get better pay and more likely to be promoted. Being deemed unattractive or lacking the right dress sense can be reasons to be denied a job, but they are not illegal.</p> <p><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/146954050200200302#:%7E:text=DEFINING%20THE%20AESTHETIC%20ECONOMY%20An,omic%20calculations%20of%20that%20setting.">Some researchers</a> have described an emerging aesthetic economy. Clearly this raises concerns about unfair discrimination, but without the legal protection afforded to, say, disabled people.</p> <p>Not only has this trend continued during the pandemic, it might even have been compounded. With the first genuine signs of rising unemployment <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/employmentintheuk/october2020">reported this month</a>, research already suggests a <a href="https://www.recruitment-international.co.uk/blog/2020/08/job-applications-spike-by-more-than-1300-percent-for-some-roles">14-fold increase</a> in the number of applicants for some job roles. For example, one restaurant in Manchester had over <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/28/eight-people-claiming-employment-support-for-every-vacancy-says-thinktank">1,000 applicants</a> for a receptionist position, while the upmarket pub chain All Bar One reported over 500 applicants for a single bar staff role in Liverpool.</p> <p>Employers are now clearly spoilt for choice when it comes to filling available positions, and those perceived to be better looking will likely have a better chance. We know <a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2020-0314/full/html?skipTracking=true">from research</a> by the University of Strathclyde’s Tom Baum and his colleagues that the hospitality industry was precarious and exploitative enough even before COVID.</p> <p>It all suggests that lookism is not going away. If we are to avoid the archaic practices of the old normal permeating the new normal, it is time to rethink what we expect from the workplace of the future. One obvious change that could happen is making discrimination on the basis of looks illegal. That would ensure that everyone, regardless of their appearance, has equal opportunity in the world of work to come.</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><em>This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/lookism-beauty-still-trumps-brains-in-too-many-workplaces-148278" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. </em></p>

Beauty & Style

Placeholder Content Image

Dads are missing out on parental leave

<div class="copy"><p>Social pressure and workplace culture are preventing <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/science/biology/genetically-you-are-closer-to-your-father-than-your-mother/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">fathers</a> from using flexible working hours to take parental leave, <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-030-75645-1_13" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">new research</a> from the University of South Australia suggests.</p><p>Australia has one of the lowest rates of parental leave taken by men, who represent <a href="https://www.oecd.org/els/family/PF2-2-Use-childbirth-leave.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">less than 1%</a> of parental-leave recipients, despite Australia’s national <a href="https://www.dss.gov.au/our-responsibilities/families-and-children/programmes-services/paid-parental-leave-scheme" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Paid Parental Leave scheme</a> being gender neutral.</p><p>The researchers, led by Dr Ashlee Borgkvist, investigated barriers men face when accessing flexible work arrangements, and found that many fathers felt pressure from their organisation or workplace to not use that flexibility for family reasons.</p><p>Borgkvist explains that this is primarily due to perceived, and sometimes objective, lack of support from managers and colleagues, but reflects a societal view of masculine norms.</p><p>“Workplace flexibility is typically accepted as an option for mothers, but when it comes to dads, flexibility is unlikely to be as readily accepted – and in some cases not even considered,” says Borgkvist.</p><p>“Workplace and societal norms play a big role in the lack of flexibility for dads, with many men feeling pressure to conform to stereotypical concepts of the male ‘breadwinner’ – they’re applauded for earning the dollars to support their family but frowned upon if they consider flexibility to do the same.</p><p>“Concerningly, many new fathers feel they need to prove their commitment to the job by purposely avoiding flexibility, or in some instances, taking on more hours when they become a new father. They may also take on more hours because they are feeling financial pressures.”</p><p>This means that fathers may miss out on crucial bonding stages with their child, which are often carried throughout their life and have<a href="https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/engaging-fathers-child-and-family-services" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"> positive outcomes</a> for that child’s future.</p><p>“Some fathers are trying to be more flexible – say, for example, by coming into work late after dropping the kids at school – but they’re also very aware of the need to visibly minimise their time away from paid work,” says Brogkvist. “Of course, this can depend on the workplace, but even where workplaces have flexibility policies, there is often an unspoken, or cultural, discouragement of dads taking time away from work for family reasons.</p><p>“One father I spoke to said he’d stepped back from visiting schools with his wife and child because he felt he’d taken too much time off. Another father said he wouldn’t ask for flexibility because he didn’t want to be seen as someone who tries to get out of doing work.</p><p>“So, while the desire and need for flexible work hours is there, it’s being squashed by restrictive workplace cultures. As you can imagine, these ideas around flexible work also have impacts for how women who use flexibility are perceived within workplaces.”</p><p>In Australia, <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/gender-equality-and-men" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">only 2% of organisations</a> have active set targets to improve men’s participation in flexible work, and despite the flexible work arrangements introduced during COVID-19, few organisations have adopted these arrangements long-term.</p><p>“To initiate change in relation to dads’ use of flexibility, and parental leave in particular, cultural change is vital,” says Borgkvist. “But this can only be achieved when we have strong social policies supported by business practice.</p><p>“Evidence shows that when fathers are provided with well-compensated, targeted and extended parental leave, they are very likely to take it.</p><p>“Australia is very conservative when it comes to fathers and parental leave. Only when governments and businesses can commit to tangible and practical change will we see flexibility become a real option for Aussie dads.”</p><p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p><em><img id="cosmos-post-tracker" style="height: 1px!important;width: 1px!important;border: 0!important" src="https://syndication.cosmosmagazine.com/?id=171877&amp;title=Aussie+dads+are+missing+out+on+parental+leave" width="1" height="1" data-spai-target="src" data-spai-orig="" data-spai-exclude="nocdn" /></em></div><div id="contributors"><p><em>This article was originally published on <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/people/behaviour/aussie-dads-are-missing-out-on-parental-leave/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">cosmosmagazine.com</a> and was written by Deborah Devis. </em></p></div>

Family & Pets

Placeholder Content Image

Neurodiversity can be a workplace strength, if we make room for it

<p>Emma can recognise patterns within complex code. James can develop several different solutions when faced with complicated problems. But it is unlikely either will find a job where they can put their specialist skills to work — or any job, actually.</p> <p>Emma has dyslexia. James has been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. These conditions mean communicating can be a challenge, particularly in a stressful situation such as a job interview. They may also find it difficult to work in a typical office environment with noise and bright lights.</p> <p>But often the significant challenges is other people assuming they will be less capable or difficult to work with.</p> <p>About 15-20% of the <a rel="noopener" href="https://academic.oup.com/bmb/article/135/1/108/5913187" target="_blank">global population</a> are “neurodiverse”. This term, coined by Australian <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.autismawareness.com.au/news-events/aupdate/in-conversation-with-judy-singer/" target="_blank">sociologist Judy Singer</a> in 1998, conveys <a rel="noopener" href="https://autismawarenesscentre.com/un-adopts-new-goals-disabilities/" target="_blank">the idea</a> that the neurological differences shaping how people think and interact are natural variations to the human genome. Neurodiversity therefore isn’t something to be “fixed” but understood and accommodated.</p> <p>But despite this understanding, and the gains made more generally in promoting workplace diversity, prejudices keep the employment prospects for neurodiverse individuals shockingly low.</p> <p>The cost is personal — denying individuals the chance to do meaningful work — as well as social, sending individuals to the dole queue. It also means workplaces are failing to benefit from highly valuable employees, and missing the opportunity to become better organisations in the process.</p> <p><strong>What neurodiversity covers</strong></p> <p>Neurodiversity is often referred to as an ‘invisible disability’ and covers a range of conditions. The most common are:</p> <ul> <li> <p><strong>Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder</strong> (or ADHD) manifests as inattention, distractability and impulsivity. It affects about <a rel="noopener" href="https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/economics/articles/social-economic-costs-adhd-Australia.html" target="_blank">4% of children and 3% of adults</a>.</p> </li> <li> <p><strong>Autism Spectrum Disorder</strong> (or ASD) typically involves degrees of difficulty in communicating with others and sensory overload. About <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.autism-society.org/what-is/facts-and-statistics/" target="_blank">1% of the global population</a> is estimated to be on the spectrum, with higher rates being diagnosed among children.</p> </li> <li> <p><strong>Dyslexia</strong> involves difficulties with reading and spelling. There is no agreed diagnosis. Estimates of its prevalence range from 3% to 20% (with <a rel="noopener" href="https://dyslexiaassociation.org.au/dyslexia-in-australia/" target="_blank">10-15%</a> commonly cited).</p> </li> <li> <p><strong>Dyspraxia</strong> involves challenges with coordinating physical movements, including muscles for speaking. About 2% of the population are severely affected, with <a rel="noopener" href="https://adc.bmj.com/content/archdischild/92/6/534.full.pdf?casa_token=s2n80xJNuhAAAAAA:kzF2QsFQRlR_rmpi80YkV9N8Lp8YT9bIXb1cwOEbaiZUm3f5KfRO4xPk8_F2YoXm6-bM7rHANPkqIQ" target="_blank">6-10%</a> estimated to be affected to some degree.</p> </li> <li> <p><strong>Dyscalculia</strong> involves challenges with numbers. It affects <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4461157/" target="_blank">up to 10%</a> of the population, with <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.dyslexia.uk.net/specific-learning-difficulties/dyscalculia/" target="_blank">3-6%</a> commonly cited.</p> </li> <li> <p><strong>Tourette syndrome</strong> causes involuntary physical and vocal “tics”. It affects an estimated <a href="https://tourette.org/spectrum-tourette-syndrome-tic-disorders-consensus-scientific-advisors-tourette-association-america/">0.6% of the population</a>.</p> </li> </ul> <p><strong>High unemployment</strong></p> <p>The capabilities of neurodivergent people can vary considerably from severely challenged to gifted. Some are nonverbal and fully reliant on care givers. Others have special abilities in things such as <a rel="noopener" href="https://hbr.org/2017/05/neurodiversity-as-a-competitive-advantage" target="_blank">pattern recognition, memory or mathematics</a>.</p> <p>Yet even those with exceptional talents find it hard to get and hold a job. While unemployment estimates are imprecise, they suggest these conditions are the least accepted in the working world.</p> <p>For autistic adults aged 16-64, for example, UK statistics suggest <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/disability/articles/outcomesfordisabledpeopleintheuk/2020" target="_blank">78% are unemployed</a>. This is the highest unemployment rate of any group, compared with 48% for all disabled people and 19% for all adults.</p> <p>Australian statistics put the unemployment rate for people with autism <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/disability/disability-ageing-and-carers-australia-summary-findings/latest-release">at 34%</a>. That’s still more than three times the unemployment rate of 10% for people with disabilities and almost eight times the 4.6% rate for people without disabilities.</p> <p><strong>Supporting neurodiversity at work</strong></p> <p>One problem, as Joanna Szulc and her fellow researchers at the University of Huddersfield <a rel="noopener" href="https://pure.hud.ac.uk/en/publications/amo-perspectives-on-the-well-being-of-neurodivergent-human-capita" target="_blank">have put it</a>, is “management practices frequently overlook the relationship between the above-average human capital of neurodivergent employees, their subjective well-being in the workplace and performance outcomes”.</p> <p>In other words, with understanding colleagues and a flexible work culture, neurodiverse individuals can reach their potential and be recognised as highly valuable employees.</p> <p>One case study demonstrating this is professional services giant Ernst and Young, which globally employs close to 300,000 people.</p> <p>In 2016 it established its first “<a rel="noopener" href="https://www.ey.com/en_us/diversity-inclusiveness/how-neurodiversity-is-driving-innovation-from-unexpected-places" target="_blank">Neurodiversity Center of Excellence</a>” as part of a pilot program to offer jobs to neurodiverse candidates.</p> <p>The company says it “considered business metrics only” in evaluating the program. It concluded the neurodiverse employees were comparable to neurotypical staff in work quality, efficiency and productivity. The bonus was “the neurodiverse employees excelled at innovation”.</p> <p>Australia’s Department of Defence has employed high-performing autistic individuals in its <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.defence.gov.au/annualreports/16-17/Features/CyberCapabilityTalentAutism.asp" target="_blank">cyber security</a> work. Their strengths for this work include “a remarkable eye for detail; accuracy and consistency; a logical and analytical approach to detecting irregularities; pattern-matching skills; and a high tolerance for repetitive mental tasks”.</p> <p>These lessons are being taken on board by others. In July, Google’s cloud computing division announced its <a rel="noopener" href="https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/inside-google-cloud/google-cloud-launches-a-career-program-for-people-with-autism" target="_blank">Autism Career Program</a>, which includes training up to 500 managers “to work effectively and empathetically with autistic candidates”.</p> <p>We all vary naturally. By understanding and encouraging neurodiverse individuals to be fully engaged in society, we will all reap the rewards.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/164859/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/miriam-moeller-357407" target="_blank">Miriam Moeller</a>, Senior Lecturer, International Business, <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805" target="_blank">The University of Queensland</a>; <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dana-l-ott-1252533" target="_blank">Dana L. Ott</a>, Lecturer, International Management, and <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/emily-russo-1252532" target="_blank">Emily Russo</a>, Industry Fellow, <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805" target="_blank">The University of Queensland</a></em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/neurodiversity-can-be-a-workplace-strength-if-we-make-room-for-it-164859" target="_blank">original article</a>.</em></p> <p><em>Image: <span class="attribution"><span class="source">igor kisselev/Shutterstock</span></span> </em></p>

Mind

Placeholder Content Image

Ellen's back! But viewers and critics are unimpressed with her latest apology

<p>Ellen DeGeneres' highly anticipated TV return has been met with swift backlash from unimpressed fans and critics.</p> <p>DeGeneres apologised at the start of her 18th season premiere and addressed the toxic workplace rumours that have followed her for months.</p> <p>“Sometimes I get sad. I get mad. I get anxious. I get frustrated. I get impatient. And I am working on all of that. I am a work in progress,” she said.</p> <p>She also joked that while she’s a “pretty good actress” having played a “straight woman in movies” she said she isn’t good enough to “come out here every day for seventeen years and fool you”.</p> <p>She also alluded to the toxic workplace claims, saying that the company have "made the necessary changes" without revealing what they are.</p> <blockquote style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/tv/CFZjbAdDnA7/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="12"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" rel="noopener" href="https://www.instagram.com/tv/CFZjbAdDnA7/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank">A post shared by Ellen DeGeneres (@theellenshow)</a> on Sep 21, 2020 at 6:00am PDT</p> </div> </blockquote> <p> </p> <p>Within five minutes, DeGeneres had moved on and introduced her first guest, comedian Tiffany Haddish.</p> <p>Fans weren't as quick to move on, going to Twitter to voice their disapproval about the "quite bad" apology.</p> <p>"The Ellen apology was quite bad, right?" one user asked his followers.</p> <p>"Ellen's apology made no sense to me because she seems to base it on the idea that people mistake impatience, sadness and bad moods for being unkind. That's not really how it works," another explained.</p> <p>“Ellen DeGeneres using her first monologue back after allegations of a toxic work environment to make jokes about how she‘s impatient and not a good enough actress to fake being a nice person for 18 years just grosses me out,” <a rel="noopener" href="https://twitter.com/abb3rz07/status/1308105075236073472" target="_blank" class="editor-rtflink">wrote another Twitter user</a>.</p> <p>TV critics also questioned the apology, which was first posted to social media six hours before the season premiere of <em>The Ellen Show.</em></p> <p><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/ellen-degeneres-strange-apology-for-toxic-behavior-wont-satisfy-anybody" target="_blank" class="editor-rtflink">Jezebel</a> noted: “Absent from this speech about kindness, however, was an acknowledgment of the remarkably unkind things that allegedly happened under DeGeneres’s long tenure as the head of<em> The Ellen Show.</em>”</p> <p>The<a rel="noopener" href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/ellen-degeneres-strange-apology-for-toxic-behavior-wont-satisfy-anybody" target="_blank" class="editor-rtflink"> Daily Beast</a> called it “a strange apology that’s unlikely to appease anyone.”</p> <p><a rel="noopener" href="https://variety.com/2020/tv/columns/ellen-degeneres-monologue-apology-1234777459/" target="_blank" class="editor-rtflink">Variety</a> declared the monologue “fell short”.</p> <p>“It’s hard not to feel as though an opportunity was missed here,” they wrote, imagining what had happened if DeGeneres had spoken in more detail about feeling “mad, anxious and frustrated” in the past. “Going a bit deeper — being something other than blithely kind to an audience that craves real connection — might have been welcome.”</p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Beautiful people don’t always win in the workplace

<p>Research has shown people deemed attractive <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2015.04.002">get paid more</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8116(99)00014-2">receive better job evaluations</a> and are generally <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1927">more employable</a>. It’s even been shown that <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2357756">good-looking CEOs bring better stock returns</a> for their companies.</p> <p>In part, this may be because companies believe consumers are more likely to buy things from beautiful employees, which is perhaps why <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/02/the-rise-and-fall-of-abercrombies-look-policy/">retailers like Abercrombie &amp; Fitch</a> have used looks as criteria in their hiring process. Abercrombie says it <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/24/abercrombie-ditches-shirtless-models-with-new-policies.html">stopped doing that</a> in 2015.</p> <p>There’s some evidence, however, that this worker “beauty premium” may be wearing off – at least when it comes to employees who interact with consumers. In television commercials, for example, <a href="https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/10/18/17995804/bumble-spotify-dove-real-people-in-advertisements">retailers and other companies are increasingly using real people</a> – with all their physical flaws – rather than photoshopped models to give their brands an “authentic” feel.</p> <p>Research several colleagues and <a href="https://udayton.edu/directory/business/management_and_marketing/zhang-chun.php">I conducted</a> recently suggests that companies may be wise to take this approach with customers. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.016">Our studies</a> show occasions where the beauty premium doesn’t hold – and can even backfire.</p> <p><strong>Beauty can create distance</strong></p> <p>In our first study, we wanted to better understand how consumers respond to attractive service employees.</p> <p>We invited 309 college students to read the same description of being served dinner at a restaurant and then look at an image of a person we described as their waiter.</p> <p>Participants randomly viewed either a male or female server whose facial features were edited to depict high or low levels of attractiveness, based on <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/676967">prior research defining beauty</a>. Separately, we used similar objective measures of attractiveness to rate participants on the same scale.</p> <p>We then asked participants to rate the attractiveness of the server and how “psychologically close” they felt to him or her. Participants also graded customer satisfaction, the service quality and the likability of the waiter on a scale from low to high.</p> <p>We found that how close a consumer felt toward the waiter correlated with how they rated the quality of service they received. That is, if they felt distance from the waiter, they were more likely to give him or her poor marks. Furthermore, we found that people who thought the server was attractive but were themselves not good-looking – using our objective beauty assessment – were more likely to feel distance.</p> <p>We wanted to know whether this distance was actually more about how they perceived themselves than any objective measure. So we conducted a second similar study for which we recruited 237 people who were waiting to board a flight at China’s third-largest airport, located in Guangzhou. We asked them to read a scenario about receiving meal or other service from a flight attendant while aboard the plane and view a picture of the employee. Just as in the first study, participants randomly viewed either “attractive” or “unattractive” flight attendants.</p> <p>They then rated the attractiveness of the attendant as well as themselves and indicated whether they believe there’s a connection between beauty and skill. They also rated the service received.</p> <p>We found that participants who saw themselves as less good-looking felt more distance from an attractive flight attendant and were also more likely to perceive the service as lower quality. In addition, participants who said there isn’t a connection between beauty and skill also tended to assess attractive employees’ service as low quality.</p> <p>A third and final study, in which we surveyed consumers at a shopping mall who had just had a face-to-face encounter with a service employee, further confirmed the results of the first two. In each study, we found a clear connection between beautiful workers and unpleasant customer experiences for people who are less attractive.</p> <p>So in a world that admires and hires beautiful people, our research suggests there’s a potential downside, at least in the service sector.</p> <p><em>Written by Chun Zhang. Republished with permission of </em><a href="https://theconversation.com/beautiful-people-dont-always-win-in-the-workplace-123235"><em>The Conversation.</em></a></p>

Beauty & Style

Placeholder Content Image

New research shows baby boomers are less threatened by technology in the workplace

<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">New research commissioned by technology leader </span><a href="http://links.erelease.com.au/wf/click?upn=5eYQ-2B9hvLjY4F2EakWBi1ZLO7jaULuWnZBmbjF1-2FN2Awx-2F-2FA9sj0-2BQL-2BinGrP-2BrI_hfIqhjxrH5PXl2rHT1sLDTWyF1R6hGp8veDS2OqJRfJ2gqdnaHEljBkVvra9aGlx4VjSVUbKFpLRdZf3fB2LscCpfNHBZj472Ly9XaNbOKGSrO9w0nJWn8lTtojc5Iz41jlOpJCekIRYEVTulwB977Q2DlfgspDP1rDMixltb-2FDHmXx8SrNCmjiIToeB0EoXDNalY9E7KRn64YmdzVzUef-2B6t6bZP3-2FzMJbnfRI54eK0ZKR120HaEiYqQz5nWbnR"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Genesys</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> has shown that older generations are significantly more positive towards artificial technology in Australia and New Zealand.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The new research also suggested that older generations are more comfortable with the implementation of modern workforce tools as opposed to younger respondents.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">70 per cent of respondents aged 18-38 years believe there should be a minimum requirement of human employees over AI/bots compared to 59 per cent of respondents aged 55-73 years. The younger respondents appear to be more cautious of the implementation of this technology compared to more senior respondents.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">All age demographics have reported seeing the benefit of advanced technology in the workplace, with an average of 87 per cent stating that it has a positive impact.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">However, 23 per cent of respondents aged 18 – 38 reported feeling threatened by new technology in the workplace. </span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Gwilym Funnell, Vice President of Sales and Managing Director for Genesys in Australia and New Zealand said, “Older generations are valuable members of our workplace, and these results dispel the myth that they are averse to technology. </span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“The evolution of business is calling for greater adaptability; this is when experience can be leveraged for greater success.”</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The survey also uncovered another key difference between the generations, which was the perception of the impact of technology on social interactions.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">44% of respondents aged 55-73 years report technology does not inhibit social interactions at all, while those aged 18-38 years report it does – 7% more than their older peers.</span></p>

Technology