By Pam JohnsonThere are web-thinkers and there are step-thinkers.
I'm a web-thinker. I'm most comfortable making decisions after lots of ideas and perspectives have been brought forward. I value the dissection of the issues and the differing views that contribute to the big picture.
It takes time to web-think -- and it can drive others crazy, especially those who want to quickly arrive at decisions in a more linear way, step-by-step. On the other hand, these step-thinkers can drive people like me crazy when they make a bee-line toward decisions.
This difference is just one example of the complexity leaders face in managing newsrooms made up of people with all sorts of differing styles and ways of working and communicating.
Web- and step-thinking came up in discussions at a recent conference at the American Press Institute. The conference was about API and Pew Center research on top newsroom editors, including the assistant managing editor level.
The research sought information on how these women and men saw their situations. Were they satisfied with their roles, pay, and future opportunities?
Most men and about half the women were generally satisfied. But then, an unpleasant surprise: Almost half of the women believed they would leave their current paper, either to go to another paper or to leave the news industry.
What's the problem? In part, it is webs and steps.
It was a guest speaker who introduced web- and step-thinking to the audience of 46 women and five men representing an impressive cross-section of newspapers and training institutes. The speaker, Helen Fisher, is a research associate in Rutgers' department of anthropology and the author of "The First Sex: The Natural Talents of Women and How They are Changing the World," which among other things lays out formal studies of how men and women have developed differently.
Among the differences was how they think. She was very careful not to lump all men and all women together, but she did say that on average, men tend to be "step-thinkers" and women tend to be "web-thinkers."
I cite this example because it gets to the conclusions I've drawn from this and other research.
Newsroom awareness of the value of diversity is high. We talk a lot about the number of women and journalists of color in newsrooms. We talk about where they are on the newsroom seating chart. And thank goodness we do. It's important to keep these issues at the tops of our minds.
But the meaning of diversity is also personal, and we don't often talk about it that way. For the individual staff member, diversity goes beyond issues of color and gender. It goes to issues of, "How much I am valued, included, developed, and a part of the action?" Staff members ask: What ways exist for me to offer ideas, try new roles, or influence coverage?
It could be eye-opening for leaders to find out how individuals throughout the newsroom answer these questions.
There is additional insight in a study published this year by the McCormick Fellowship Initiative in conjunction with the National Association of Minority Media Executives Foundation. Poynter's Keith Woods wrote the report, called "Do We Check It At the Door?" (Download it as a PDF from NAMME.org.)
What strikes me about this research is the extent to which minority executives believe they leave part of themselves outside the company door. They feel that to be totally who they are could hamper their newsroom contributions.
So when diversity is personal, do staffers feel they have to "check it at the door"? How would women answer that question? I know how I would have answered that question in the 1970s. Yes, I left some part of myself at the door in an attempt to fit into predominantly male newsrooms. It took me years to build the confidence to truly be myself as a newsroom leader, but I got there, through a combination of guts and good mentors.
I suspect some of this personal diversity issue reflects what women editors were expressing in the API/Pew research. The 45 percent who had concerns about their careers reported significantly less satisfaction in:
- their relationships with superiors
- their salaries
- their organizations' definition of news
Women who were more satisfied had good mentoring experiences and access to their bosses.
Good research creates questions, not answers. For newsroom leaders, the research raises these (and other) questions:
- What do you know about how your immediate reports view the relationship with you and how they view their career and role?
- Do you leave part of yourself at the door when you come to work? Do you think others do? Is that to be expected? Or is it sacrificing something valuable?
- When diversity is personal, how can you understand the individuals in your newsroom and help discover what additional contributions they can make? What opportunities might you spot for them by understanding them better?
If you're a web-thinker like me, you'll want to hear a variety of responses and think them through. That's good. But this may be a time to step-think -- and quickly -- so we can slow the departure of women and minorities from our newsrooms. Our future depends on it.
