Latest / Women at Work: Career, Leadership & Modern Work / How the Likeability Trap Hurts Women Career Advancement
Transcript
- Lucas: Luna, I want to start with a number that has stuck with me since I came across it last month. A 2023 study in Harvard Business Review looked at thousands of performance reviews across a range of industries and found that women are two and a half times more likely to receive negative feedback about their personality than men are. Luna: Two and a half times. That's not subtle. And 'personality' usually means things like 'too aggressive' or 'not collaborative enough'—basically, the likeability trap. Lucas: Exactly. And that's what I want to drill into today: the likeability trap, and specifically how it holds women back from advancing into leadership or even staying in the pipeline. It's a version of the double bind—be competent but not too assertive, be warm but not too soft. Luna: And the classic example is the study where they gave people the exact same resume with a male name and a female name. The male candidate was seen as competent and hireable; the female candidate was seen as competent but unlikeable. Lucas: Right, that's the Heidi/Howard experiment from the early 2000s. They presented the same story of a successful venture capitalist—when it was Howard, people liked him and respected him. When it was Heidi, they respected her but disliked her. That's the seed of the trap. Luna: So for women, being competent triggers a social penalty. And if they dial back the competence to be more likeable, they risk being seen as not serious enough. Lose-lose. Lucas: And it compounds over time. A study from Columbia Business School found that women who negotiate for higher pay are seen as more demanding and less likeable, while men who do the same are seen as more competent. That one negotiation can cost you not just money but future opportunities, because you're now labeled as 'difficult.' Luna: And this is where it intersects with the motherhood penalty and all the other taxes we've talked about on this show. The likeability trap is like an extra layer of sand on the uphill climb. Lucas: I want to bring in a specific case that illustrates this really well. Bo Young Lee—she was Uber's first chief diversity officer. She came in after the 2017 crisis, and she was direct, data-driven, and pushed hard for change. In a 2022 New York Times profile, she talked about how her directness was often perceived as aggression. Colleagues said she was 'difficult to work with.' A male executive with the same style would have been called 'tough but fair.' Luna: And I think that's especially brutal because she was in a role that inherently requires challenging the status quo. She was brought in to make waves, and then punished for making them the way a leader would. Lucas: Right. And she's not alone. A 2018 study in the Journal of Applied Psychology found that women who express anger at work are seen as less competent and lower status, while men who express anger are seen as more competent and higher status. The same emotion, different judgment. Luna: So what's the way out? I mean, the structural fix has to come from organizations—changing how evaluations are written, training managers to spot bias. But in the meantime, what can women actually do? Lucas: There are some strategies that research supports. One is framing assertiveness as a commitment to the team's success. Instead of 'I need this by Friday,' saying 'For us to hit our deadline, it would be great to have this by Friday.' It softens the ask without losing the demand. Luna: That's the 'communal framing' tactic. It works because it ties the assertiveness to a group goal, which aligns with the warmth expectation. But it's tiring to have to code-switch like that. Lucas: Absolutely. And that's the cost we need to acknowledge—the extra cognitive load of managing perception. But another powerful tool is getting a sponsor, not just a mentor. Someone with organizational power who will vouch for you in rooms where you're not present. Research from the Center for Talent Innovation found that women with sponsors are more likely to get promotions and bigger assignments. Luna: Because the sponsor can say, 'She's direct, but she delivers results. I've seen it.' That reframes the narrative. Lucas: Exactly. And organizations can do more, too. Some companies have started anonymizing performance reviews or using structured evaluation criteria that focus on specific behaviors rather than personality traits. That reduces the likeability bias significantly. Luna: And speaking of organizations doing things—if we've helped you think through a career move or understand a workplace dynamic a little better, a couple of dollars a month is genuinely what keeps these shows going. You can find us at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. Lucas: Yeah, it's a small way that makes a big difference for us, and it keeps everything ad-free. So if you've gotten something out of the show, that's where to go. Luna: Exactly. So back to the likeability trap—I think one thing that doesn't get enough attention is how this plays out in remote and hybrid environments. When you're not in the room, it's easier for people to project a personality onto you. Lucas: That's a good point. A 2021 study from Stanford found that women are more likely to be interrupted in virtual meetings, and their ideas are more likely to be ignored or credited to someone else. That's the likeability trap in action—if you speak up assertively to claim your idea, you risk coming across as aggressive. Luna: And if you don't, your idea gets stolen. So you're penalized either way. Lucas: One tactic that works is the 'amplification' strategy that women in the Obama White House used. When a woman made a point, another woman would repeat it and credit her by name. That way the idea gets attributed correctly, and it takes the burden off the individual woman to claim it. Luna: That's a great example of an ally behavior—not just for women but for anyone who wants to be an ally. Amplify, don't self-promote. Lucas: And there's also the 'think manager, think male' bias that we've touched on before. In a classic study by Schein, people associated leadership traits more with men. That's the root of the likeability trap—when women exhibit leadership traits, they violate the gender norm. Luna: Which is why the trap is so sticky. It's not just individual bias; it's baked into our cultural ideas of what a leader looks like. Lucas: So what do we do about it as women? Beyond the individual strategies, I think there's a need for more women in leadership positions to normalize a wider range of leadership styles. When women see other women being direct and successful, it changes the template. Luna: Representation matters, but it's not enough. Organizations also need to change the evaluation criteria. For example, the NCAA revised its hiring guidelines for coaches to include a statement about bias, and the number of women hired increased. Lucas: Right, structural changes work. And one I find promising is the use of 'bias interrupters' developed by the organization LeanIn.Org. These are simple checklists and prompts that managers use during performance reviews to catch language like 'she's too aggressive' and ask 'would you say that about a man?' Luna: And that's the kind of tool that doesn't require a huge budget or a company-wide overhaul. Any team can start using it tomorrow. Lucas: So bottom line: the likeability trap is real, it's measurable, and it costs women promotions and pay. But there are evidence-based ways to navigate it—individually through framing and sponsorship, and systematically through bias interrupters and structured evaluations. Luna: And I think the most important takeaway is that it's not a personal failing. It's a structural problem. So if you've felt that tension between being liked and being competent, it's not you—it's the trap. Lucas: Well said. And if you have a story about navigating the likeability trap, we'd love to hear it. You can reach us through the show notes. For now, that's all from us. Take care. Luna: Thanks for listening.