When Managers Are Open, Men Feel Heard and Interrupt Sexism

Negin Sattari, PhD, Sarah DiMuccio, PhD, Ludo Gabriele

The Role of Manager Openness and Feeling Heard in Men’s Responses to Workplace Sexism

Imagine you’re a man at work and a peer makes a sexist comment about a woman on another team. How do you react—do you shrug it off, doing nothing at all? Passively push back with an eye roll or sarcastic comment? Or directly admonish your colleague?

This split-second decision hinges in large part on whether or not you feel that your manager is open to hearing your ideas and that, more broadly, your voice is heard in your workplace. It doesn’t matter if your manager is even in the room—just the fact that you have a manager who displays openness and a workplace that makes you feel heard in general has a powerful influence on your behaviour at this particular moment.

Our study of over 2,100 men in France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom reveals that men who experience high levels of manager openness—when their manager shows interest in and acts upon employee ideas, views, and suggestions—are almost twice as likely to say they would directly interrupt a sexist comment at work as compared to men who report low levels of manager openness. In addition, men who say their managers are more open are twice as likely to feel heard at work at high levels, and men who feel heard are in turn almost twice as likely to say that they would directly interrupt a sexist comment. Feeling heard refers to employees’ belief that their views about their jobs are considered in decision-making—not only by their managers but by the organisation in general.

As organisations strive to stamp out sexism and other forms of discrimination that prevent many employees from reaching their full potential, our findings offer a positive strategy for creating an environment where men feel comfortable calling out sexism at work. While it’s also important to know what not to do, these findings illustrate what managers and workplaces can do:

 

  1. Managers can demonstrate openness by showing an interest in their employees’ ideas and acting on them.
  2. Organisations can foster an environment where managers are encouraged to be open and where all employees feel heard, regardless of rank or title.

Key Findings

  • Manager openness is linked to men’s intent to interrupt sexism both directly and indirectly through improved feelings of being heard.
  • 62% of men who experience high levels of manager openness say that they would likely directly interrupt a sexist comment, compared to only 35% of men who report low levels of manager openness.
  • 79% of men who experience high levels of manager openness also report feeling heard at high levels, compared to only 34% of men who experience low levels of manager openness.
  • 61% of men who feel more heard say that they would likely directly interrupt a sexist comment, compared to 35% of men who feel less heard.

For the past 20 years, I’ve seen people’s mindsets evolve, including at the leadership level in global corporations, by becoming more inclusive and more mindful of women’s daily challenges. For the most part, they grow more inclined to listen to their colleagues, put themselves in their shoes, and speak up for them should the occasion arise. By empowering each employee to be in the driver’s seat and to have a say at any stage of their journey, we build the foundations of the future company culture we want to evolve—a culture of openness, transparency, empathy, and fairness.
– Marc Secretan, Partner, Workforce Diversity & Inclusion, PwC

About This Study

Interrupting Sexism at Work is a research initiative exploring organisational conditions that encourage or discourage men from responding when they witness incidences of sexism in the workplace. The initiative includes countries in North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. This report is the fourth in the series.

For this study, we surveyed 2,135 self-identified men who work full-time in six European countries: France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Participants represent a diverse group, spanning a range of industries, organisational ranks, job tenure, and ages as summarized below.

Age Range: 19-78 Average: 39Organisational Rank Non-management 26% First-level management 32% Second-level management 27% Senior-level management (but not CEO) 15%Country United Kingdom 22% Germany 21% Netherlands 16% Italy 14% Sweden 14% France 13%Job Tenure Less than 1 year 5% 1-5 years 32% 6-10 years 28% 11-15 years 16% 16-20 8% More than 20 years 10%Industry Manufacturing 15% High tech, telecom 13% Healthcare, education, government, nonprofit 13% Finance, accounting, real state 11% Other (non-STEM) 11% Retail, hospitality, entertainment, tourism 10% Business services, consulting 10% Other (STEM) 5% Consumer products, pharmaceuticals 4% Resources, utilities, energy 4% Agriculture, textiles 2% Insurance 2%

Men Are Essential to Rooting Out Sexism

Experiences of workplace sexism are the norm for a large group of women globally, even in countries with relatively high gender equality. In a survey of more than 5,000 women in five European countries, researchers found that nearly 60% of respondents reported experiencing at least one form of sexism in the workplace.1 While these countries are some of the leaders in closing the gender gap at a national level,2 sexism has proven to be an insidious and deep-rooted barrier to women’s advancement.

The negative effects of sexism on employees’ performances and outcomes are well documented. Workplaces cannot thrive if even a small group of employees suffers from day-to-day sexism. Furthermore, sexism hurts people of all genders, organisations, communities, and nations.

Given these harmful effects, it’s essential that men—who make up 50% of the global population and maintain an outsized presence in workplaces, leadership, and positions of power—participate in the work of interrupting sexism. Men must do their part to reduce all forms of sexism at work by acting as partners and using their gender privilege to call out colleagues who make sexist comments.

Unfortunately, our data show that approximately 50% of men across countries say that they would be unlikely to directly interrupt a sexist comment at work.

Many men are unlikely to directly interrupt a sexist comment France NOT likely to directly interrupt sexism 45% Likely to directly interrupt sexism 55% Germany NOT likely to directly interrupt sexism 52% Likely to directly interrupt sexism 48% Italy NOT likely to directly interrupt sexism 49% Likely to directly interrupt sexism 51% Netherlands NOT likely to directly interrupt sexism 50% Likely to directly interrupt sexism 50% Sweden NOT likely to directly interrupt sexism 53% Likely to directly interrupt sexism 47% United Kingdom NOT likely to directly interrupt sexism 46% Likely to directly interrupt sexism 54%

Manager Openness Promotes Interrupting Sexism

To learn how to improve these numbers, this research series has examined several factors related to men’s various responses to sexism at work. In our first report,4 we found that men who work in a “climate of silence”—an environment in which employees feel restrained from constructively speaking up about organisational or work-related problems, concerns, or challenges5—are less likely to both call out sexism and be committed to and confident in doing so.

In this report, we examine manager openness and employee feelings of being heard—what we might think of as key behaviours and experiences that help alleviate a climate of silence.

To start, we looked at the positive effects of managers who help their employees feel that their ideas are interesting, worthy of consideration, and fairly evaluated.6 Through our survey, we found that when managers demonstrate openness to employee perspectives in this way, men are more likely to directly interrupt a sexist comment.

  • Overall, 62% of men who experience high levels of manager openness say that they would likely directly interrupt a sexist comment compared to only 35% of men who report low levels of manager openness.7

This finding suggests that manager openness doesn’t just encourage employees to speak up about issues directly related to their work; it also has a spillover effect on their willingness to discuss broader issues or concerning behaviours with other colleagues.

Men-Who-Have-Open-Managers-Are-More-Likely-to-Directly-Interrupt-a-Sexist-Comment

When managers display openness, they invite men employees to engage in directly interrupting sexism—and a larger cultural transformation becomes possible, to the benefit of all employees and the entire organisation.

 

Our finding is consistent with evidence from other research about the many positive outcomes of manager openness for organisations.

Previous research has found that organisational citizenship behaviours—the kind of behaviour that is not formally or explicitly enforced, but which occurs when employees are willing to go above and beyond to improve their workplace8—are improved by manager willingness and ability to listen9 (which ties to managerial openness). These types of behaviours “support the social and psychological environment10” of work. Whether men are conscious of it or not, interrupting sexism is an organisational citizenship behaviour. An important element of such behaviours is courtesy, which includes supportive behaviours that are meant to prevent or respond to colleagues’ work challenges.11

Men who interrupt sexism undertake a voluntary action to improve conditions in their workplace and to disrupt a culture of disrespect and insensitivity. Manager openness can improve the chance that men take the issue of organisational culture personally and choose proactively to contribute to an atmosphere where sexism of any kind is not tolerated.

Additionally, other research has documented that leaders who create a receptive, open, and encouraging environment can increase the chances that employees express their ideas and concerns to other colleagues.12 In the context of interrupting sexism, our findings suggest that men with open managers would be more willing to directly respond by, for example:

  • Addressing sexist comments in the moment.
  • Inviting someone who engages in sexist behaviour into a conversation afterward.
  • Reporting the issue to HR.

These types of actions have important implications for combating workplace sexism because direct responses can be more influential than unassertive reactions such as using body language, humor, or sarcasm to denounce the sexist comment and, of course, remaining passive by doing nothing.13

Finally, employees’ perceptions of managers’ listening skills are essential in shaping their job performance and outcomes, such as better job satisfaction in addition to lower emotional exhaustion and turnover intentions.14 This evidence further supports our findings because when men are engaged in the work they do, don’t experience exhaustion, and intend to stay in their workplace, there is a higher chance that they will put effort into resolving problematic issues and patterns they see in their workplace, including sexism.

Managers are among the first loops of the chain that connect employees to the broader organisational climate, shaping employees’ understanding of how things are done, what is considered acceptable, and what is not. Clearly, when managers display openness, they exert a broad and powerful influence on individual employees that can lead to meaningful organisational change.

Feeling Heard Is the Key

But how exactly does manager openness encourage men to interrupt sexism? We dug into the relationship, and we found an intermediate mechanism that explains a large part of how it works: employee feelings that their voices are heard at work.15

Using your voice means voluntarily speaking up when you see problems in the workplace. It’s important to note, however, that exercising your voice does not necessarily mean you will be heard.16 Feeling heard is an outcome of using your voice. It means that your views about your job and your organisation are acknowledged and considered when decisions are made. It’s the feeling that, when you use your voice at work, someone actually is listening.17

While there is abundant research about employee voice, there is relatively little on feeling heard. One study showed that employees experience frustration when they speak up, sometimes repeatedly, but do not feel that they are being heard.18 On the other hand, when employees perceive that they have opportunities to make their voice heard, they have a greater sense of responsibility to the effectiveness of their organisation.19

We specifically found that manager openness can boost men’s overall sense of feeling heard in their workplace.

  • Overall, 79% of men who experience high levels of manager openness feel more heard compared to only 34% of men who report low levels of manager openness.20
Men Who Have Open Managers Are More Likely to Feel Heard

 

This sense of feeling heard is then directly connected to interrupting sexist comments:

  • Overall, 61% of men who feel more heard say that they would likely directly interrupt a sexist comment compared to 35% of men who feel less heard.21
Men Who Feel More Heard Are More Likely to Directly Interrupt a Sexist Comment

Conversely, men who feel less heard tend to react more passively. Compared to men who feel more heard, men who feel less heard are more likely to say they would do nothing rather than directly interrupt.22 In addition, they are more likely to say they would react unassertively rather than directly interrupt.23

A likely explanation for these men’s reluctance to directly interrupt is that they perceive higher costs. In particular, we found that men who feel less heard are more likely than men who feel more heard to believe they will be viewed negatively if they interrupt sexism in the workplace.24

Men’s concerns about how they will be viewed are justified. For example, research shows that employees who use their voice to challenge existing structures and give critical feedback are viewed more negatively and are less likely to gain status within the organisation. This research finds that men’s status, in particular, can take a sizeable hit when they challenge (as opposed to promote) an organisation’s status quo.25

At the same time, men are socialized to value status from a young age; maintaining a high status in various contexts including the workplace is a central component of societal images of who a “real man” is. The costs for men, therefore, can extend to anxiety about their masculine status, which we have also discussed in a previous report.

So, it’s not surprising that men are more likely to interrupt sexism when they not only have open managers but also feel more heard in their job. The more employees feel listened to at work, the more they perceive that they have the power, leverage, and capital to say or do something in the face of sexism.

 

For organisations, this means that a focus on manager openness alone is not enough–organisations must create cultures and establish mechanisms to help employees feel that their input and expertise matter to decision-makers in the organisation; that they are listened to; and that their ideas are heard and acted upon at work.

 

Our findings suggest that when organisations create these cultures and mechanisms, they positively affect men’s feelings of personal agency.

Compared to men who feel less heard, men who feel more heard are roughly:

All Countries

3x more likely to:

  • Be highly committed to combating workplace sexism. 26
  • Be highly confident in their ability to effectively interrupt sexism.27
  • See benefits to the common good in interrupting sexism. 28

2x more likely to:

  • See personal benefits in interrupting sexism. 29

*See the endnotes indicated above for the corresponding analyses of each individual country presented below.

France

4x more likely to:

  • See the common benefits.

3x more likely to:

  • Be confident.
  • See the personal benefits.

2x more likely to:

  • Be committed.

Germany

3x more likely to:

  • Be committed.
  • See the common benefits.
  • See the personal benefits.

2x more likely to:

  • Be confident.

Italy

6x more likely to:

  • See the common benefits.

4x more likely to:

  • Be committed.
  • Be confident.
  • See the personal benefits.

Netherlands

3x more likely to:

  • See the personal benefits.

2x more likely to:

  • Be committed.
  • Be confident.
  • See the common benefits.

Sweden

3x more likely to:

  • Be confident.

2x more likely to:

  • Be committed.
  • See the common benefits.
  • See the personal benefits.

United Kingdom

2x more likely to:

  • Be committed.
  • Be confident.
  • See the common benefits.
  • See the personal benefits.

We showed in a previous report that personal agency predicts a large portion of men’s intent to directly interrupt sexism.

These findings provide an important piece of the puzzle in understanding how organisations can create conditions that encourage men to interrupt sexism at work. With this new knowledge, we can identify specific steps that leaders can take to increase manager openness and feeling heard in their organisations.

Fostering an inclusive environment results in all team members feeling empowered to voice their ideas and opinions. By committing to open dialogue, we have the opportunity to collectively formulate impactful strategies and support passive bystanders to become engaged agents of change.
– Avi Kahn, Member of the Executive Board, Hilti Group

Take Action

 

Managers are uniquely positioned not only to make men feel that their voices are welcome but also contribute to a culture of people feeling heard in the workplace. In this environment, it’s much more likely that the next time a man hears a sexist comment about a woman on another team, he’ll speak up.

Manager Openness

Because of their position in the organisational hierarchy, managers are well-placed to influence employee perceptions of whether the culture will reward or punish speaking up about sexism or other issues.30 But many employees do not feel that their manager is open to hearing their feedback. Around 40% of our survey respondents indicated that they experience little to no manager openness. Managers are uniquely positioned not only to make men feel that their voices are welcome but also contribute to a culture of people feeling heard in the workplace. In this environment, it’s much more likely that the next time a man hears a sexist comment about a woman on another team, he’ll speak up.

Many-Men-Do-Not-Experience-Manager-Openness-at-Work

If you’re a manager, you can demonstrate more openness by fostering an environment of sharing and connection, which should lead to the formation of relationships and atmosphere necessary for employees to feel welcome to express their ideas about their jobs.

Open your eyes and ears:

  • Make a conscious effort to find out who your employees are as complete humans with interests, obligations, and experiences outside of their work lives.
  • In team meetings, dedicate time for employees to share their current state (physical, mental, emotional) and workload, if they would like.
  • Build deeper relationships by sharing elements of your own life to model transparency and practice vulnerability.

Open your heart:

  • Foster humility and authenticity by valuing a growth mindset over perfectionism.
  • Talk about your own (past and present) mistakes and how you addressed them, so mistakes are seen as learning opportunities, not sources of shame and blame.
  • Destigmatise physical, emotional, and mental struggles so you and your team feel comfortable asking for support when necessary.
  • Acknowledge your own biases and that you still have work to do as part of your journey to becoming an inclusive leader.

Open your mind:

  • Do not undervalue people skills—content expertise may be an important aspect of job performance, but how work gets done should be as important as what gets done.
  • Encourage team members to contribute ideas and insights about processes, projects, and team/organisational culture, even if they are beyond the direct scope of their responsibilities.
  • Analyse what team members have shared with you, ask clarifying questions if necessary, and take steps to address their concerns.
  • Close the loop. Share how you’ve incorporated employee feedback into decisions, and be open about feedback that is not actionable or doesn’t align with organisational goals.

Feeling Heard

Feeling heard is often taken for granted or assumed when employees exercise their voices, but it is not a given even when managers are open. Around 40% of our survey respondents indicated that they have little or no experience with feeling heard.

Many men do not feel heard at work France % with little to no experience 37% % with some to a lot of experience feeling heard 63% Germany % with little to no experience 41% % with some to a lot of experience feeling heard 59% Italy % with little to no experience 37% % with some to a lot of experience feeling heard 63% Netherlands % with little to no experience 36% % with some to a lot of experience feeling heard 64% Sweden % with little to no experience 43% % with some to a lot of experience feeling heard 57% United Kingdom % with little to no experience 41% % with some to a lot of experience feeling heard 59%

If you’re a manager, recognize that feeling seen, understood, supported, and safe at work all spring from employee feelings of being heard.

Feeling heard = Feeling seen:

  • Be totally present when interacting with your team—in other words, avoid multitasking.
  • Sharpen your observation and active listening skills by paying attention to what employees are saying, what they are not saying, and body language and facial expressions.
  • Notice atypical behaviours such as unusual quietness or increased nervousness. If you notice something, privately invite the team member to share in a non-confrontational way: “I noticed you were particularly quiet in today’s meeting….Is everything okay?”

Feeling heard = Feeling understood:

  • Listen to understand an issue from your colleague’s point of view, not to respond.
  • Resist the urge to “fix” the problem when a colleague reaches out with a challenging situation.
  • Strive to relate to the situation at hand by being inquisitive and asking questions to better understand and assess the situation.

Feeling heard = Feeling supported:

  • Practice empathy by seeking to understand your colleague’s experience, even if it is different from your own.
  • Offer support by asking what they need, instead of assuming.
  • Remember that support can take many different forms: providing a compassionate ear, creating a safe space to vent, or taking action.

Feeling heard = Feeling safe:

  • Create an environment that feels psychologically safe31—where people feel free to speak up and take risks without fear of repercussions—so they feel comfortable reaching out to you when they feel the need.
  • Make your availability known repeatedly—some employees may need to hear the invitation more than once before taking the leap.
  • Make invitations to share free of pressure. It should be acceptable and safe for employees to decline the invitation to share, and to share as much or as little as they want.

About the Previous Reports in This Series

Our first study, Interrupting Sexism at Work: How Men Respond in a Climate of Silence, drew on insights from a study conducted in Mexico to highlight the negative impacts of a climate of silence in the workplace on men’s intention to comment on observed sexist behaviours. It showed that men who experience higher levels of silence in their workplace see more costs and fewer benefits in interrupting sexist behaviours in the workplace.32

The second study, Interrupting Sexism at Work: What Drives Men to Respond Directly or Do Nothing?, examined the role that personal agency and organisational conditions play in predicting men’s responses to workplace sexism using data gathered in Canada. In particular, we found that negative organisational environments such as a climate of silence, a climate of futility, and a combative culture are responsible for a large portion of men’s intent to do nothing in response to workplace sexism.33

The third study, Masculine Anxiety and Interrupting Sexism at Work, examined the role of masculine anxiety in shaping men’s decision to do nothing in response to workplace sexism using data gathered in the United States. We found that a higher level of masculine anxiety is related to men’s intent to do nothing in response to incidences of sexism and that masculine anxiety is exacerbated in combative workplace cultures.34

A companion to these reports, Men’s Stories of Interrupting Sexism, features in-depth quotations and stories culled from interviews with 27 Canadian men committed to gender advocacy, explaining in their own words their experiences, insights, and challenges with interrupting sexism at work.

Methodology

We surveyed 2,545 self-identified men who work full-time across industries and ranks in six European countries: France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Since we focus on managerial openness, we removed from our analysis the respondents who selected “CEO,” “Not applicable,” and “Other” in response to the question “What is your rank within your company?” This narrowed our sample to 2,135 men.

Survey questions examined men’s perceptions of their organisational conditions and their work experiences; behavioural intentions in response to incidences of sexism in the workplace; levels of commitment to, confidence in, and awareness of benefits of interrupting sexism; and perceived consequences of interrupting sexism. Additional questions in the survey were not used in this study.

We analysed the data using descriptive statistics; correlation; linear, logistic binomial, and multinomial regression; and mediation analysis in IBM SPSS Statistics version 25. Where relevant, all results presented were significant at p < .01 unless otherwise noted.

To obtain the quotations, two questions were sent to Catalyst’s Supporter network of leaders and diversity, equity, and inclusion practitioners to gather their thoughts on this report’s findings. The quotations shared here were selected from the responses we received. Personal information is provided with individuals’ consent.

Acknowledgements

We thank our donors for their generous support of our work in this area: MARC (Men Advocating Real Change)

Transformational Donor
Chevron logo
Major Donors
Proctor & Gamble logo DOW logo

Partner Donors
KeyBank
Northrop Grumman

Supporter Donors
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Sodexo SA

We also extend deep gratitude to Dr. Ethan Burris, Professor of Management, University of Texas at Austin, for offering initial guidance on the concept and measurement of manager openness and feeling heard.

How to cite: Sattari, N., DiMuccio, S., & Gabriele, L. (2021). When managers are open, men feel heard and interrupt sexism. Catalyst.

Endnotes

  1. European Observatory on sexism and sexual harassment at work. (2019). Fondation Jean-Jaurès and the Foundation for European Progressive Studies.
  2. Global gender gap report: Insight report. (2021). World Economic Forum.
  3. Lamarche, V. M. et al. (2020). Clever girl: Benevolent sexism and cardiovascular threat. Biological Psychology, 149; Salomon, K., Burgess, K. D., & Bosson, J. K. (2015). Flash fire and slow burn: Women’s cardiovascular reactivity and recovery following hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(2), 469-479; Velez, B. L., Cox Jr., R., Polihronakis, C. J., & Moradi, B. (2018). Discrimination, work outcomes, and mental health among women of color: The protective role of womanist attitudes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65(2), 178–193.
  4. Shaffer, E., Sattari, N., & Pollack, A. (2020). Interrupting sexism at work: How men respond in a climate of silence. Catalyst.
  5. Morrison, E. W. & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706–725.
  6. Detert, J. R. & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869–884.
  7. Chi-square analyses were conducted on all countries combined and each individual country to test the difference in percentages of those who directly interrupt based on level of manager openness. The observed values were significantly different than the expected values in all analyses with the following statistics: All countries: X2(1) = 141.71, p < .001; France: X2(1) = 30.17, p < .001; Germany: X2(1) = 29.54, p < .001; Italy: X2(1) = 42.12, p < .001; Netherlands: X2(1) = 8.38, p < .01; Sweden: X2(1) = 22.57, p < .001; United Kingdom: X2(1) = 18.64, p < .001.
  8. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85–97.
  9. LIoyd, K. J., Boer, D., Keller, J. W., & Voelpel, S. (2015). Is my boss really listening to me? The impact of perceived supervisor listening on emotional exhaustion, turnover intention, and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(3), 509-524.
  10. Organ, 1997.
  11. Polat, S. (2009). Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) display levels of the teachers at secondary schools according to the perceptions of the school administrators. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 1591–1596.
  12. Edmondson, A. C. (2003). Speaking up in the operating room: How team leaders promote learning in interdisciplinary action teams. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1419–1452.
  13. Shaffer, Sattari, & Pollack (2020).
  14. Bregenzer, A., Milfelner, B., Šarotar Žižek, S., & Jiménez, P. (2020). Health-promoting leadership and leaders’ listening skills have an impact on the employees’ job satisfaction and turnover intention. International Journal of Business Communication; Lloyd et al. (2015).
  15. We conducted a mediation analysis using Hayes’ PROCESS macro package. The association between managerial openness and men’s intent to directly interrupt sexism was mediated by increased levels of feeling heard. We controlled for participants’ age, rank, tenure, sexual orientation, country of work, and the extent they identified with dominant groups in their society. The total effect of managerial openness on the likelihood of direct responses was significant (b = 0.25, SE = 0.02, p < 0.0001). The direct effect of manager openness on the likelihood of direct responses was significant (b = 0.16, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001) and its indirect effect through improved experiences of feeling heard was also significant (b = 0.09 [LLCI = 0.06, ULCI = 0.13]). The association between managerial openness and feeling heard was significant (b = 0.6, SE = 0.02, p < .0001) and the association between feeling heard and likelihood of directly interrupting was significant as well (b = 0.15, SE = 0.02, p < .0001).
  16. Joynt, S. (2019). The cost of “not being heard” and clergy retention. Acta Theologica, 39(1), 110-134.
  17. Ruck, K., Welch, M., & Menara, B. (2017). Employee voice: An antecedent to organizational engagement? Public Relations Review, 43, 904-914.
  18. Joynt (2019).
  19. Klammer, J., Skarlicki, D.P., & Barclay, L. (2002). Speaking up in the Canadian military: The roles of voice, being heard, and generation in predictive civic virtue. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 34(2), 122-130.
  20. Chi-square analyses were conducted on all countries combined and each individual country to test the difference in percentages of men who feel more heard based on level of openness. The observed values were significantly different than the expected values in all analyses with the following statistics: All countries: X2(1) = 451.68, p < .001; France: X2(1) = 53.00, p < .001; Germany: X2(1) = 93.51, p < .001; Italy: X2(1) = 67.56, p < .001; Netherlands: X2(1) = 30.22, p < .01; Sweden: X2(1) = 66.19, p < .001; United Kingdom: X2(1) = 153.81, p < .001.
  21. Chi-square analyses were conducted on all countries combined and each individual country to test the difference in percentages of men who would likely directly interrupt based on whether they feel more or less heard. The observed values were significantly different than the expected values in all analyses with the following statistics: All countries: X2(1) = 136.78, p < .001; France: X2(1) = 11.83, p < .001; Germany: X2(1) = 27.70, p < .001; Italy: X2(1) = 44.75, p < .001; Netherlands: X2(1) = 14.76, p < .01; Sweden: X2(1) = 26.09, p < .001; United Kingdom: X2(1) = 19.65, p < .001.
  22. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to examine the impact of feeling heard on the likelihood of directly interrupting a sexist comment as compared to the likelihood of doing nothing. The logistic regression model was statistically significant: X2 (33) = 59.2, p < .01. The Nagelkerke R Square was 0.03. The odds of directly responding compared to doing nothing for those who experience lower levels of feeling heard was 0.63 times the odds for those who experienced higher levels of feeling heard. Age, rank, tenure, sexual orientation, country of work, and the extent they identified with dominant groups in their society were included as covariates.
  23. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to examine the impact of feeling heard on the likelihood of directly interrupting a sexist comment as compared to the likelihood of unassertively reacting. The logistic regression model was statistically significant: X2 (33) = 59.2, p < .01. The Nagelkerke R Square was 0.03. The odds of directly responding compared to unassertively reacting for those who experience lower levels of feeling heard was 0.66 times the odds for those who experienced higher levels of feeling heard (p < .05). Age, rank, tenure, sexual orientation, country of work, and the extent they identified with dominant groups in their society were included as covariates.
  24. Binomial logistic regression was performed to examine the impact of feeling heard on the likelihood that men expect high levels of interpersonal costs for interrupting sexism. The logistic regression model was statistically significant: X2 (11) = 31.92, p < .01. The Nagelkerke R Square was 0.04. Compared to men with low levels of feeling heard, men who experienced higher levels of feeling heard had 0.56 times lower odds of high levels of expecting interpersonal costs for combating workplace sexism (p<.01). Age, rank, tenure, sexual orientation, country of work, and the extent they identified with dominant groups in their society were included as covariates.
  25. McClean, E. J., Martin, S. R., Emich, K. J., & Woodruff, T. (2018). The social consequences of voice: An examination of voice type and gender on status and subsequent leader emergence. Academy of Management Journal, 61(5), 1869-1891.
  26. Separate binomial logistic regression analyses were performed on all countries combined and each individual country to examine the impact of feeling heard on the likelihood that men report high levels of commitment to combating workplace sexism. Age, rank, tenure, sexual orientation, country of work, and the extent they identified with dominant groups in their society were included as covariates. The logistic regression models were all statistically significant with the following statistics: All countries: X2 (11) = 139.04, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.09; France: X2 (6) = 17.46, p < .01, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.09; Germany: X2 (6) = 36.42, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.11; Italy: X2 (6) = 37.8, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.17; Netherlands: X2 (6) = 23.81, p < .01, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.10; Sweden: X2 (6) = 15.52, p < .05, Nagelkerke R Square = .071; United Kingdom: X2 (6) = 28.77, p < .01, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.08.
  27. Separate binomial logistic regression analyses were performed on all countries combined and each individual country to examine the impact of feeling heard on the likelihood that men report high levels of confidence in their ability to effectively interrupt sexism. Age, rank, tenure, sexual orientation, country of work, and the extent they identified with dominant groups in their society were included as covariates. The logistic regression models were all statistically significant with the following statistics:  All countries: X2 (11) 166.68 p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.11; France: X2 (6) = 20.02, p < .01, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.10; Germany: X2 (6)32.73, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.10; Italy: X2 (6) 40.31, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = .19; Netherlands: X2 (6) 16.4, p < .05, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.07; Sweden: X2 (6) 23.86, p < .01, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.11; United Kingdom: X2 (6) 44.53, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.12.
  28. Separate binomial logistic regression analyses were performed on all countries combined and each individual country to examine the impact of feeling heard on the likelihood that men report high levels of belief in the impact on the common good in interrupting sexism. Age, rank, tenure, sexual orientation, country of work, and the extent they identified with dominant groups in their society were included as covariates. The logistic regression models were all statistically significant with the following statistics:  All countries: X2 (11) 155.62, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.10; France: X2 (6) = 34.02, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.17; Germany: X2 (6)28.18, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.09; Italy: X2 (6) = 49.49, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.09; Netherlands: X2 (6) 22.87, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.09; Sweden: X2 (6) = 22.62, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.10; United Kingdom: X2 (6) = 31.88, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.09.
  29. Separate binomial logistic regression analyses were performed on all countries combined and each individual country to examine the impact of feeling heard on the likelihood that men report high levels of belief in the personal benefits of combatting workplace sexism. Age, rank, tenure, sexual orientation, country of work, and the extent they identified with dominant groups in their society were included as covariates. The logistic regression models were all statistically significant with the following statistics:  All countries: X2 (11) 139.87, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.09; France: X2 (6) = 31.18, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.16; Germany: X2 (6)34.13, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.10; Italy: X2 (6) = 28.04, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.13; Netherlands: X2 (6) 25.00, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.10; Sweden: X2 (6) = 18.99, p < .001, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.09; United Kingdom: X2 (6) = 19.20, p < .01, Nagelkerke R Square = 0.06.
  30. Burris (2012).
  31. Travis, D. J., Shaffer, E., & Thorpe-Moscon, J. (2019). Getting real about inclusive leadership. Catalyst.
  32. Shaffer, Sattari, & Pollack (2020).
  33. Sattari, N., Shaffer, E., DiMuccio, S., & Travis, D. J. (2020). Interrupting sexism at work: What drives men to respond directly or do nothing? Catalyst.
  34. DiMuccio, S., Sattari, N., Shaffer, E., & Cline, J. (2021). Masculine anxiety and interrupting sexism at work. Catalyst.