Videoconferencing Etiquette: Promoting Gender Equity During Virtual Meetings

Abstract

Considerable evidence has demonstrated that gender influences interactions during in-person meetings, most commonly, negatively impacting women and persons of color. Pervasive gender stereotypes about roles that were (and are) occupied by men and women lead to implicit assumptions about competency in said roles. For example, women may receive more negative verbal interruptions or nonverbal cues that undermine their authority as a leader, a stereotypically male-typed role. The coronavirus pandemic has led to the rapid rise in videoconferencing in professional interactions; however, little is known about videoconferencing etiquette and how gender bias permeates to this new setting. Although there are many benefits to the use of this technology, it has the potential to reinforce gender bias rooted in cultural and societal norms, gender stereotypes, and traditional gender roles. The well-documented implicit biases that have been shown to favor men over women during in-person meetings may translate to further gender gaps in leadership during virtual meetings. It is also possible that videoconferencing could be used to reduce gender bias, but until we have research to shine a light on this topic, this article provides 10 tips for promoting gender equity during virtual meetings.

Introduction

The coronavirus pandemic has accelerated the adoption of videoconferencing across several platforms. This practice is expected to grow and gain a permanent place in our professional interactions.¹ There are many benefits to videoconferencing; however, this mode of interaction allows access to information during any communication that is not typically known or available when interactions occur in person in a work setting or a national or international meeting. Despite wide acceptance of a gender spectrum, binary stereotypes about men and women continue to be reinforced in our society.²

Stereotypes about the roles historically (or currently) occupied by men and women overlap with stereotypes about men and women in mutually reinforcing ways.^2,3 This leads to implicit assumptions that women are more competent than men in domestic and caring roles and less competent than men in stereotypically male-typed roles such as leader, scientist, and physician.^4–6 Even if we do not consciously endorse gender stereotypes, we know them. However, being aware of such stereotypes means that any extraneous information that aligns with a gender stereotype—no matter how trivial—will inadvertently and unwittingly activate the entire stereotype.⁷ Making seemingly “harmless” comments (such as those in Table 1) can have undue repercussions for that individual and other attendees. For women, activation of the female-gender stereotype can reinforce implicit assumptions of their lower competence and lack of “fit” for male-typed roles.^4,8 This article reviews the literature on gender stereotypes and implicit bias in the context of in-person meetings, extrapolates this research to videoconferences and provides recommendation for promoting gender equity.

Table 1.

Examples of Statements that May Reinforce Female-Gender Stereotypes

“I can't believe you're wearing polka dots with stripes!”

“Your kids sound like they need you.”

“I've never seen you without makeup; you look tired.”

Virtual meetings create unique challenges to the impression one is making on others in a meeting, for example, if other meeting participants (of any gender) view glimpses of children on the video screen or if a woman must leave the videoconference to temporarily interact with children it may reinforce the stereotyped assumption that women with children are not fully committed to their job or are less ambitious.⁹ Conversely, given the prescriptive norms for gender in our society,¹⁰ women may also be judged negatively if laundry or dishes are visible in the background during a videoconference (a “communality deficit”).¹¹

Gender stereotypes also favor men and disfavor women in technical expertise, as a result, any difficulty with connectivity during a videoconference is likely to reflect more negative on women than men. Experimental studies confirm that women are implicitly held to certain standards for managing their physical appearance and are judged harshly for failing to meet these standards inside and outside of the professional setting.^12–14 Thus, impression management is another potential challenge in videoconferencing platforms where camera angles, degree of magnification, and lighting can insert unflattering images of women.

Gender dynamics play out in many ways when meetings are held in person, including identifying the “leader” of a group and verbal and nonverbal responses to others within a meeting. In a classic study, Porter et al. found that students judged the person sitting at the head of the table to be the leader in a meeting except when that person was female in a mixed-gender group in which case they judged the male sitting next to her to be the group leader.¹⁵ Experimental studies with scripted actors playing roles in a group problem-solving exercise found more nonverbal negative affect such as frowning, grimacing, or head shaking when the leader was female even when she was judged to be as competent as her male counterpart.^16,17 Such negative nonverbal messages may undermine the authority of a female leader in an in-person meeting. Unfortunately, negative behavioral responses from meeting participants may continue to negatively impact women leaders in virtual meetings unless a meeting is large enough that facial expressions cannot easily be interpreted. In addition, videoconferencing (compared with in-person meetings) may feel like an environment in which these negative behaviors are more acceptable. One option to consider would be to ask participants to turn off their videos when the leader of the meeting is speaking; this may effectively shift attention to the leader of the meeting and negate potential negative nonverbal cues.

Communication in mixed-gender meetings can be affected by gender proportions and the selected mode of decision-making.^18,19 As example, Hoyt et al. found that women asked to lead an all male versus all female group had more anxiety and suffered in the assessment of leadership performance when gender stereotypes were activated.²⁰ Mendelberg et al. experimentally manipulated gender composition in 94 five-member work groups that were tasked with making a collective decision.¹⁸ They found the proportion of women in a group influenced the number of interactions between genders and the types of interactions, specifically, the number of positive interruptions (e.g., “I agree”). When decision-making was by majority rule, women received more negative (e.g., “I don't know” or “I sort of disagree”) than positive interruptions. When women received positive interruptions, they were perceived by others in the group to have greater authority, experienced higher levels of self-validation, and increased their participation.^18,19,21 Of note, when men were in the minority, they were more likely to influence collective decision-making when it was derived by unanimous rather than by majority rule.

In most virtual meetings, participants are expected to mute their microphone and/or turn off their video when they are not speaking. It is difficult to know how virtual meetings may impact mixed-gender communication. Virtual meetings may help minimize the number of negative interruptions experienced by women, thereby correcting distortions and leading to increased participation in conversations. In contrast, the lack of positive affirmations or nonverbal cues on video may disadvantage women who rely on these for relationship building. Virtual meetings also avail opportunities for written dialogue through the chat function; interestingly, women and men also differ in their communication styles through the written word. Women continue to often apologize (more than men), ask questions, and use supportive language. Whereas men tend to use sarcasm to convey strong assertions and self-promotion.²² It would be interesting to assess how verbal and written communication contribute to a participant's volubility in a meeting.

Volubility (time spent talking) is important in signaling authority in meetings held in person for men and women and likely also important in virtual meetings.^21,23 However, women may be judged harshly if they are perceived to be taking too much time talking in meetings. This was confirmed by Brescoll who found that female leaders with high volubility were rated as less competent and less suitable for leadership than either a female leader with low volubility or a male leader with high volubility.²⁴ Women were aware of this need to limit their volubility due to concern over incurring social backlash from appearing to talk too much and thus confirming a strongly held stereotype that women talk more than men.^24–26

It is unclear how gender stereotypes will affect volubility in a situation where everyone is expected to be muted unless they are speaking. As clear distinctions are made between speakers in virtual meetings, it may challenge these strongly held stereotypes. Because there is no “head of the table” in a virtual meeting and because—at least in meetings larger than six on many platforms—subtle facial expressions are not readily recognizable to other members, it is unknown whether despite the potential disadvantages, virtual meetings may offer women leaders some benefit over in-person meetings.

Videoconferencing etiquette may also be extended to conferences as gender also influences interactions at national professional and scientific organizations. Duma et al. found women speakers were less likely to be introduced by their professional titles compared with men at the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the largest international oncology conference. In fact, they were more likely to be introduced by their first name only.²⁷ Similar findings have been reported in internal medicine grand rounds.²⁸ These practices can subtly but effectively reinforce a gender hierarchy in which women are of lower social status than men²⁹ and could undermine a woman's performance right before she speaks by triggering stereotype threat.³⁰

As most organizations are holding their upcoming meetings virtually, it remains unknown if these meetings suffer the same gender asymmetry in the practice of speaker introduction. Several studies have found that women are less likely than men to ask questions of speakers at scientific meetings.^31–34 How the ability to proffer questions virtually through chat or another mechanism influences women's question-asking practices is worthy of investigation. Local, national, and international virtual meetings all create potential opportunities to reinforce gender equity. In addition, it is important to note that virtual conferences may indeed help women, who tend to be the primary caregivers for families and may not otherwise be able to attend in-person conferences.

A considerable proportion of communication and the development of interoffice relationships develop organically, sometimes occurring entirely outside the workplace, such as over dinner or drinks. Given the restraints during the pandemic, these social interactions are markedly limited. As such, Malhotra et al.³⁵ recommend the distribution of a “skills matrix” to highlight the diversity in the team and specific expertise of each team member. In addition, creating space for small engagements (such as breakout rooms) where people can connect in smaller groups may foster trust and collaboration that may lend itself to greater team cohesiveness. Communication between meetings may also serve to increase connectedness between team members, such as discussion threads or bulletins on websites to share spontaneous announcements (work and personal) similar to making an announcement in the middle of an office.³⁵ The aforementioned action items may be best utilized to integrate stereotypical gender roles commonly identified by men and women. For example, men tend to favor clear objectives for the team (identifying and utilizing skills to complete the project at hand), whereas women may place higher importance on communication skills to increase cohesion in the team and thereby, increase virtual bonding.^35,36

Recommendations for Promoting Gender Equity in Virtual Meetings

Virtual meetings for local institutional meetings or national conferences are here to stay. We propose 10 tips for promoting gender equity in virtual meetings (Table 2). The underlying premise of these recommendations is to appreciate and value individual differences on a personal and professional level to capitalize on the multiple benefits of diversity in academic medicine (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, religion, age, sexual orientation, discipline, and rank).^37,38 Ultimately, we urge conference organizers and speakers to recognize that cultural stereotypes can inadvertently influence our judgment and decision-making in social interactions and to be intentional about mitigating bias in virtual meetings. We do not yet have research to guide us in making recommendations on how to mitigate bias in virtual meetings, but engaging in inclusive meeting practices and practicing cultural humility is a good start.

Table 2.

Ten Tips for Promoting Gender Equity During Virtual Meetings

Managing expectations

(1) Be intentional in communicating respect and value individual differences on a personal and professional level

(2) Explicitly set the expectation for an equitable and inclusive engagement at the outset of the meeting and set norms

(3) Use features of the video platform to encourage active participation from attendees

(4) Invite silent participants to the conversation and amplify contributions that have been ignored or claimed by someone else

Mitigating bias

(5) Take action if you witness a biased statement against another person

(6) Use gender-neutral and status-neutral terms

(7) Avoid referring to someone's physical appearance or physical surroundings

Logistics/scheduling

(8) Honor scheduled time for meetings

(9) Unless there is a clear consensus on the part of all potential attendees, do not schedule meetings outside of work hours

(10) If agendas or other information are integral to a meeting, distribute necessary information early enough to allow all participants time to prepare

Managing Expectations

The leader of a meeting should begin with a statement affirming the meeting's broader goal (e.g., “we are here to contribute to training an excellent and diverse physician workforce” or “the purpose of this meeting is to engage all stakeholders in a common set of clinical practices”) rather than a more transactional goal such as “let's get this meeting done in 30 minutes” or “I know we all want to get out of here on time.” The meeting leader can assert that “to accomplish this goal we need to hear from all of you,” acknowledging that access to any extraneous information through the video format should have no bearing on assumptions about an individual's commitment and competence (tip 1).

Expectations should be clearly stated at the outset (e.g., ground rules) specifying respectful engagement and explicitly inviting contributions from all participants. When possible, use unanimous rather than majority rule in collective decision-making whenever possible—especially if there are few women in the group (tip 2). Building on group expectations for interactions, the meeting leader should also cite norms regarding how people will communicate at the beginning of each meeting: Will everyone be asked to have their microphones on mute when they are not speaking? Will people share their video or be asked to turn it off to maximize reception? When someone has a question, should they click the hand-raising icon, enter text in the chat room, or just call out? If appropriate, it may be helpful to have an open chat, question and answer format, or allow for longer periods of silence between questions. Whatever the format, the rules for any given meeting should be reviewed at the start (tip 3).

During the meeting, the leader needs to manage the volubility of meeting members—including their own. If certain members are monopolizing the conversation, the leader may specifically call on silent participants with a reminder to unmute their microphone to prevent embarrassment, such as “Lupita, what do you think? Please unmute before you speak.” If someone is interrupted, a suggested response could be “Amit made that suggestion earlier; can you elaborate on your suggestion, Amit” (tip 4).

Mitigating Bias

It is important to take action if one witnesses a biased statement against another person, such as interrupting with an interjection such as “ouch” or “that statement makes me uncomfortable” or calling out a stereotype (e.g., “Let's not put Jose in the position of having to speak on behalf of the entire Latinx community”). It may be helpful to diffuse a situation by speaking to shared values such as “we value diversity in our department” (tip 5). If you are the target of a biased comment or action and decide that you want to speak up, you may consider asking a question (e.g., “What would you think that?”), deflecting defensiveness by acknowledging that we all know stereotypes (e.g., “I know we all know stereotypes about xxx, but I clearly am…”). Normalize the use of gender-neutral language such as “people,” “folks,” “individuals,” and “all of us,” and steer away from using gendered terms such as “ladies,” “guys,” or “gentlemen.” Eschew terms that reinforce group status or stereotypes such as “junior member of the group,” “senior member of the group,” or “our voice for diversity issues.” You may invite participants to add their preferred pronouns to their screen name if the technology platform allows and address participants by the correct pronoun (tip 6).

Comments referring to physical appearance should be avoided, as they may especially undermine women's authority in a meeting. Because the implicit activation of gender stereotypes can be damaging, it may be useful for the meeting leader to normalize variables at home that may be outside someone's control.³⁵ Examples of this include phrases such as, “we know that working from home poses additional challenges for all of us, and I want to remind us all that any information you glean about appearance, home environment, or parental responsibilities has nothing to do with one's ability to be effective in their professional roles” (tip 7). Although it is important for a team leader to set expectations for a culture of understanding in a meeting, each participant must also take ownership of their own role. Participants may use technology to their benefit, such as creating professional virtual backgrounds for use in meetings.

Logistics/Scheduling

The logistics of scheduling meetings can be another potential source of amplifying gender inequity. Extending meetings past the prescribed time for a virtual meeting makes it difficult for some to leave the call without seeming abrupt or rude. Wary of reinforcing gender stereotypes of not being committed to their work,^39,40 some women may feel compelled to stay in a meeting and be delayed or unable to meet other obligations. This can be circumvented by scheduling buffer time into a meeting, such as scheduling a 50-minute meeting in a 60-minute window. Another strategy is to appoint a timekeeper, freeing up the leader to efficiently facilitate the meeting (tip 8). Although it seems easier to schedule meetings outside of normal work hours, this is another practice that disproportionately impacts women who are more likely than their male counterparts to be the primary caregivers for families.⁴¹ This is further exacerbated at present because schools may be closed due to the pandemic and childcare has become more challenging to obtain. As a result, interruptions by children should be expected and normalized with no gender-based comments after these interruptions (tip 9). If agendas or other specific information is to be discussed during a meeting, distribute information early enough to allow all participants to prepare for the meeting (tip 10). Despite these concerns, virtual meetings have many practical benefits, including increased access, flexibility, and potential for being more inclusive.

In summary, despite the tenacious “think manager-think male” phenomenon^42,43 gender does not predict the effectiveness of leaders,⁴⁴ physicians,^45,46 or scientists.⁴⁴ Nevertheless, seemingly small biases that disadvantage women being evaluated for or evaluated in leadership positions can compound over time and amplify existing gender disparities.^47–49 We identified potentially salient factors in the new normal of videoconferencing that could provide advantages or could further disadvantage women in medicine or erode the tremendous progress women have made for the past several decades. It will be important to identify similarities and differences in interactions during virtual meetings and their impact on gender dynamics. When information available in videoconferencing leads to stereotype-based, or otherwise prejudicial statements, we must call them out—whether they emanate from gender, racial, ethnic, sexual identities (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer [LGBTQ]), religious, or other cultural groups. We must remain vigilant because biases are often implicit and persist in insidious ways whether or not we believe them. It is also important to acknowledge that research involving nonbinary and gender fluid participants is lacking for in-person meetings and is an important topic of investigation for virtual meetings.

Our goal in this article is to raise awareness of the potentially negative impact that videoconferencing platforms can have on women, especially on the perception of women as effective, competent leaders in academic medicine, and remind readers that breaking our bias habits requires conscious and consistent effort.⁵⁰ Videoconferencing may add another roadblock to overcoming gender bias^8,51 rooted in cultural and societal norms, gender stereotypes, and traditional gender roles.⁵² However, research is clear that with intentional effort, we can use practical and evidence-based strategies to counteract the impact of gender stereotypes in virtual contexts.

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Funding Information

Dr. M.C. research on scientific workforce diversity is supported by National Institutes of Health Grant #R35 GM122557.