How Can I Sign New Hampshire Banking Presentation

How can i industry sign banking new hampshire presentation easy

all right so if you're just logging on for joining us this is the second svrc session organized by me shannon roski i'm an assistant professor at the university of wisconsin oshkosh for today's session we have jen griffith from the university of new hampshire presenting banking on leniency how idiosyncracy credits impact responses to sexual harassment jennifer griffith is an assistant professor of organizational behavior and management at the peter t paul college of business and economics and a fellow at prevention innovations research center both are housed within the university of new hampshire she's also the director of the modern work lab a student-led research group and co-founder of the whisper coalition a research driven resource that provides practical tools for reducing sexual harassment and improving gender equity in the workplace her research broadly focuses on the effects of psychosocial factors such as attributions expectations emotions and identity in the workplace most recently her work has considered workplace policy and interventions both pre and post-hire to address identity-based bias and sexual harassment uh today's session is a working paper presentation so um hopefully jennifer will get lots of feedback from your questions and comments we'll do about 40 minutes for the actual paper presentation and then a 15 minute or so q a session afterwards and then following the question and answer session i'll just do a very quick november preview for our session next month um for today's session please keep your mic on mute during the presentation and use headphones to reduce background noise during the question and answer session if you're speaking please turn off your camera if you're experiencing any lag because that can help with your streaming quality during the presentation please type your questions in the chat jennifer is happy to answer questions i will be monitoring the chat for her and i'll read your questions to her while she is presenting if you have any questions during the presentation you can find the chat in the side panel um you might see like a purple couple of arrows if you click on that a side panel will open up and then just click on the chat bubble and you can type your questions in there and then during the question and answer session we'll be using the raise your hand feature so that you can ask jennifer questions verbally and you'll find the raise your hand button at the bottom of the screen where you can turn your microphone and camera on and off you can raise your hand and then i'll call on you and you can unmute yourself and ask your question so with that i'm going to hand things over to jennifer to start her presentation all right great i'm just gonna share my screen here okay so um i am jennifer griffith as shan said thank you much for that very kind introduction um i am presenting um on behalf of my co-author kelsey medeiros and i on what clearly is a working project um we are currently in um the stages of um designing another study as a follow-up to this so as shannon said any and all advice or questions are absolutely welcomed we would really love to hear them to improve our own work so today what i want to spend a little bit of time talking about um clearly is workplace sexual harassment but also the barriers that might be faced in terms of making those who engage in sexual harassment accountable for their behavior and the role of idiosyncrasy credits in um as a barrier to accountability so i'm going to talk about idiosyncrasy credits quite a lot a little bit later but just as a as a foundation to understanding that um idiosyncrasy credits are how we accumulate goodwill whether by being a good performer having integrity gaining status having a good reputation all of those things kind of contribute to our quote-unquote bank of credits and allow us to spend those credits in ways when we engage in non-normative behavior additionally i'm going to spend some time thinking about different stakeholder perspectives and how different people interpret both sexual harassment incidents and also how those different idiosyncrasy credits might impact their their interpretation of sexual harassment and what should be done as a result of that to start i want to take just a second um to how we got here kelsey and i were primarily interested when we started thinking about sexual harassment prevention in a place where i think most people do and that is with training so how can we design the best kind of individual based training programs for decreasing sexual harassment and assault at work and we spent a lot of time digging through the literature in this area specifically with respect to college campuses and the particular interventions training interventions that they were testing empirically in those environments and of course what we found were a lot of information about how content differs about how the delivery of that content differs and a variety of different ways that we measure sexual harassment behavior sexual assault behaviors and if that actually that training really transfers long-term meaning when we look at multi-wave studies following training programs do are there training programs content delivery that actually works so from this paper um we we don't we delved into the specifics of training quite a lot but the thing that we really were left with more interest in is that element of transfer so what are the particular um dimensions within the organization's culture that really helped to transfer training and in addition to that we also were starting to notice even in those workplaces that presumably have the time money and effort to promote um sexual harassment prevention training um that are not exempt from the specific laws that dictate when training should happen like mcdonald's and walmart big tech firms um big big finance firms they were still seeing these kinds of unmistakable sexual harassment assault and rape in some cases we also noticed that in different kinds of work environments we saw higher instances of these these instances these incidences as well so we are leaving out a large proportion of people um including you know um teenagers who often work in fast food um undocumented immigrants um and those who are at a real disadvantage in terms of power asymmetries um a lot of the suggestions that we had in terms of training what kind of training didn't really apply to those circumstances but we thought that we could think of something that did and one of the things that we noticed was training often aims to change individual level behavior without really considering the role of those organizational reinforcing systems that are in place um in every organization not just in the ones that provide training and so again um i think mindy bergman's comrade in relation to our training paper in iop was excellent and really hammered this point home that there is a major problem in terms of the reinforcing systems and um that's really something that we need to spend more time and energy thinking about um because um sexual harassment training on its own does not really reduce workplace sexual harassment even the best training will not work well will not be implemented in the workplace if sexual harassment incidents those who engage in sexual harassment are not held accountable for their behavior so we've thought about this question for quite a while now and trying to stress out how can we how can we explore this question empirically what sort of things might we be able to isolate and manipulate in order to understand how people make sense of these situations and how they determine their responses to them one of the the models that um really stuck out in this regard was the triangle model of responsibility which really focuses in on these three different elements that are connected to each other that help us explain and understand when people take responsibility for their actions so this this triangle is composed of three things hence the name so prescriptions or what is supposed to be done this might be things like formal or informal rules and norms um but essentially gives you an idea of how you should act or behave um events so the actual actions or events that have happened or that will happen in or that will happen in the future but then also identity so individual characteristics of the person that is engaging in the behavior you know what are those sorts of characteristics and how do they play a role this triangle model of responsibility has also been extended to consider things like blaming and excuse making and how those different elements of the triangle model are related to each other so there are some really interesting examples of how this works in terms of what excuses you might use when you don't feel like those elements of responsibility are aligned people are most likely to take responsibility for their actions when they have a clear understanding of what they should do of what the event that has occurred is and how they are related to it so when any of those different elements are related say if there's a missing link between what people think they should do and the actual event that occurs um maybe the excuse there for um not acting and not acting in a way that signals personal responsibility for their actions is to say this is a gray area and of course we see this a lot with sexual harassment and assault as well um particularly with respect to those kind of sexual harassment behaviors that maybe some might consider very harassing and others might consider not harassment and just a joke or flirting and that sort of thing so that excuse this is a gray area helps to eliminate the responsibility that somebody might feel in that circumstance so similarly when the the link between prescriptions or what you think you should do and your identity are not related to each other if you don't feel like you have a role to play so in essence denying personal obligation um and an excuse example of that is that this is not my problem i'm not responsible for taking care of this particular problem or i'm not it's not my responsibility to come up with a solution um and this this part at the the bottom here between identity and events right this is really the part that i was most interested in spending time thinking about um why do people deny that they have personal control over the circumstance or as has also been extended from the triangle model of personality why do other people um fail to hold others accountable as a function of their identity right and again we saw examples of this um in our own work i mean in reading the life spanning narratives of women who worked as surgeons a lot of them kind of internalized this excuse that people provide to them of bad behavior that's just how that person is that's just their personality that's how they interact with people um so we really were interested in that identity component we're not really interested in trying to suss out how people make sense of the gray areas so we wanted to eliminate that and in our own research in this case in this scenario it's very clear that what has happened is sexual harassment and everybody agrees that that is the case so in that instance the event is known and clear and what somebody should do in that case is also clear and in doing so we isolate the impact of identity of understanding why that excuse might come forward that's just how they are so we really focus in on that identity based barrier to accountability what are the things that we focus on when somebody engages in sexual harassment what are the things that we pay attention to about that person in order to make sense of the situation and determine what we should do in response idiosyncrasy credits provide us a really interesting and enlightening way to consider these work-based identities so a lot of of the work in this area has focused on important questions like um do we hold white people more accountable or black people more accountable for their behavior and what we wanted to do here instead was to focus on working identities so we build up these identities based on how well we do our jobs of whether we're high or lower task performers whether we have integrity uh what our job role is whether we're the boss or we're a team member or we're a ceo in other words whether we have status and also whether we have built up this bank of credits based on those other things so have we accumulated over time a good reputation have we accumulated over time um the this era around being a hard worker being a good performer now this idea of idiosyncrasy credits hasn't really been applied to sexual harassment or understanding why people might respond in certain ways to sexual harassment and so we were interested in it for that reason but its origins um in terms of hollander's original ideas regarding idiosyncrasy credits were surrounding creativity so what are the ways that we build up these credits to allow us to say stupid things or to be a jerk in other words how do we build up these allowances that give us permission essentially to deviate from behavior that we say is the norm or that we expect and so in that case we have a similar situation with sexual harassment we know that this is non-normative behavior that people should not be engaging in so do people use those credits that they've banked over time to in essence get out of being punished for these sorts of non-normative damaging sexually harassing behaviors now i should note that we were really inspired um to go back and think about what do idiosyncracy credits look like in a lived experience at work and we pulled these examples from a paper that we published earlier this year in which we evaluated summarize created thematic um content analysis from life spanning narratives of women working in surgery positions that tend to be male dominated and what we found all over the place were examples of these different idiosyncrasy credits at work so in terms of status over and over again we saw that um the women that were in these positions were willing to um forego a lot of um they were willing to suffer abuse so that they could learn from people who were quote unquote high performers so again that's a kind of idiosyncrasy credit willing to give up one thing um which is um the a less hostile work environment in order to learn from that person so we see those kinds of performance-based idiosyncrasy credits all over the place likewise for things like status here there's an example specifically of an attending surgeon who yelled and assaulted all the people that they worked with and we see other examples as well of individuals who engaged in these behaviors because they were in charge because nobody really had any oversight over their behavior and likewise we also saw examples of how people accumulated credits over time and how those credits impacted decisions for accountability and responsibility and specifically we saw a few times they said they'd never heard of anything like this happening before or expressing credulity about how they're not this kind of person and they definitely would not engage in that behavior so these are examples pulled from the words of the the women that experience them so they're not just theoretically things that impact their work lives these are things that they are having to deal with every day and so we really wanted to understand at the core do those idiot credits of the agent of sexual harassment impact responses to sexual harassment incidents specifically how do people respond what do they think should happen as a result of a sexual harassment incident depending on how many idiosyncrasy credits the agent of sexual harassment has accumulated and what kind they are and we also wanted to know does it really matter who you're asking these questions about if you're asking someone internal to the organization are they likely to pay attention to certain kinds of credits and not others does a certain combination of credits is that more impactful for making organization level decisions um and also if it's somebody external to the organization how are the how's the advice that they're going to give different from somebody internal to the organization and again we drew a lot of inspiration from real life events for putting this study together we wanted it to be as realistic and true to life as possible and so what we did was um look up the blog that susan fowler wrote about her time at uber in which she experienced sexual harassment from her boss and we we took two paragraphs from this blog it's still available you can read it um and we we embedded some of our manipulations uh that we use for this study into um those paragraphs and specifically we altered the person that engaged in harassment in terms of status whether they were her boss or a co-worker whether they were a high or low performer so again something about performance types of idiosyncrasy credits and whether they had used credits previously or they had credits banked and for us that meant was this the person's first offense or not right do they have credits changed because this hasn't happened in the past um or have they used some credits previously specifically with respect to this incident now i will note just as a um a note about uh susan fowler's own words here we didn't really have to change that much there were already idiosyncrasy credits embedded in her blog specifically she had written that she was told this person was a high performer meaning they had stellar performance reviews from their superior those are her own words and so we see again that these things are happening and potentially having consequences for how sexual harassment is handled and so we wanted to test out those things and see exactly how that's working and how people are making decisions based on that information about the agent of sexual harassment so in terms of our study design we wanted to keep it simple um we wanted to allow people to talk through what they would do with an open-ended response once they viewed one of the eight scenarios that embedded these different combinations of idiosyncrasy credits within it so we again asked them to tell us you know from an internal perspective if you were somebody that had some power to do something about this situation what would you do what would your recommendations be just to kind of get an idea of what they were thinking how they would pull the information from the scenario to make this decision from an internal to the organization perspective and we also asked them from an external perspective say you were a friend of somebody who this happened to what advice would you give them about how they should move forward in their job what should they do and after they answered those open-ended questions of course we asked them some specific information about themselves to make sure that we didn't see any strange skewed responses depending on um things like if somebody had experienced sexual harassment in the past um or their gender or their race um and those sorts of things we did not find anything there um in total we had about 266 responses for both um the internal perspective 266 there and 266 for the external perspective as well now we found quite a lot in this data set as you might imagine there was a lot of coding to do um and my co-author and i kelsey we went through and created a code book for my research assistants and then they recoded all of their responses to fit within these different dimensions that we expected they might say something about and in terms of these responses that we got um i want to focus on just a few things for the sake of time today uh one of those is the severity of consequences as a result of sexual harassment um the second is with respect to this different stakeholder perspectives and how idiosyncrasy credits impacted those things um and last the combination of idiosyncrasy credits and how those might have impacted um the severity of consequences that were suggested so first i want to start out at the most basic level which is to say we saw a ton of variation in terms of severity of consequences both from an internal and an external perspective anything from moving the target of harassment so the person that was harassed putting them into a different job or department that was suggested um moving the agent of harassment the person who engaged in the harassment again that's something that happens pretty frequently so that might be pulled from an actual experience that they remembered and that might be something that they would suggest early on um a lot of people suggested that we should talk to the agent of harassment um meaning discussing policies with them thinking through their behaviors trying to get quote both sides of the story and then last the most severe cases were to suggest firing the agent of harassment um entirely we saw much different um some very very different uh responses from the external perspective and the one that was most frequent was this first listed here do nothing wait and collect more evidence so that was the suggestion that most people provided if they were external to the circumstance people also suggested that this person who was harassed maybe should get a new job um or report the incident to somebody else higher up the chain um and threaten but not actually quit um so that's an important distinction here i'm gonna return to that point um very shortly for a very important reason um when we get to talking about the specifics of idiosyncrasy credits and how they impact those consequences what we found in terms of idiosyncrasy credits was that they signaled different things to different stakeholders so from an internal perspective we didn't find that status or the credits banked over time had a substantial impact on the consequences that people suggested as a result of sexual harassment but we did find that performance or being a high or low performer did change some of the endorsements that people made of the consequences resulting from sexual harassment so i have a couple examples here for instance um people who were high performers were more likely to uh or we're less likely sorry to be issued a warning than local performers um likewise we see that low performers are more likely to be dealt with there at that level whereas opposed to if you are responding to an incident committed by a high performer um they responded 13 of people responded they would rather the manager deal with that circumstance so kind of taking it off their hands and putting it back into a different level i think where a really interesting story here is is the external perspective to the organization we found a lot of really interesting findings here that might cue us into how people are thinking through sexual harassment and strategically planning out or providing advice for what should happen in those circumstances we didn't find that status really had any significant impact but we did find um a lot of differences in terms of performance also the credits banked over time so i want to draw attention to this um threatening to quit right i mentioned before what we did see is that in the case when somebody was being harassed by a low performer their friends hypothetical friends would be more likely to suggest 12 percent of them said you should threaten to quit but absolutely nobody suggested that whenever the person the harasser was a high performer and i find this difference to be really stark and startling and maybe provide some insight into um the decisions that people make um how are they comparing between the actual person that was harassed and the person that harassed them is this really a competition between who is the best performer right and although we we see exactly that's this example here we didn't test that mechanism so clearly there is a lot of work to be done in that regard additionally um these last two at the bottom collecting evidence and doing nothing um we're often interrelated to each other so if somebody said do nothing often they followed it up with but also collect more evidence before moving forward um so you see there's a large discrepancy here between a low performer and a high performer in terms of what somebody would suggest if you gen high performer yes i'm sorry go ahead we have a question do you want to finish your thought and then i'll ask it oh sure yeah um so in that instance um the the suggestion really was please do nothing right if you have a high performer make sure that you are not antagonizing the situation make sure that you collect more evidence whereas that clearly was not a major priority if it was a low performer in comparison okay our question is from anna hinder who asks if you have any thoughts on the idiosyncrasy credits of the bystander and is this a factor that influences when an organization takes action or does not take action i think that is a fantastic question and it is certainly something that we are considering now um often sexual harassment might occur in the presence of somebody else and so thinking through um who that person is what are their identity uh idiosyncrasy based credits uh is really gonna be critical i think for understanding not just how they respond here but are these the same things that happen being a bystander you are internal to the organization but kind of external to that decision-making process and so they have this kind of middle ground that i think is a really interesting place um to to explore and think through but certainly we do not really have any information about that so i think that's a fantastic question and definitely something that we should explore in the future thank you for that question anna that was a great question um so in terms of banked credits those that kind of have amassed over time we also see this pattern um that maybe is counter-intuitive to what we would think should occur um in the instance that there was no previous sexual harassment occurring friends of the person being harassed were much more likely to suggest that they should report it whereas previous instances of sexual harassment reduced that amount reduced that endorsement to engage in that behavior of reporting and likewise we see a similarly troubling discrepancy when individuals did not have any previous sexual harassment people were less likely to suggest that you should do nothing whereas previous sexual harassment um behavior increased that amount substantially um so again we did not test the mechanisms for this so that's obviously caveated but we think that this points to a really important um important element of this circumstance that we should spend much more time thinking through and that is how does this pattern of behavior um how do other people interpret that information you know does this signal to those people that if this person still works there and they have engaged in this behavior before and the organization knows about it maybe they're not going to do anything and you should kind of back off so these idiosyncrasy credits although previous sexual harassment might intuitively prime us to think okay this is more serious um we need to be doing something about this um that is the opposite reaction that those external to the organization have okay sorry just going back here a bit now the last thing that we looked at were these combinations of idiosyncratics and there were a lot of different combinations as you might imagine there were eight different conditions we really wanted to be able to isolate and understand how they work together in interaction with each other we did see that credits seem to have more weight when they're combined so things like status and performance together were more important um and all of those things together plus sexual harassment teams seemed to um provide more weight to um the interpretation of what those idiosyncrasy credits mean in context but the results that we found were not always in the expected direction that we might have anticipated so for instance in the most severe response to um sexual harassment incidents firing the agent of sexual harassment what we found was that you know being a boss in some way might help ameliorate the discrepancy between high and low performance um in terms of suggesting that this person be fired it does appear that having some element of power um does reduce the likelihood that people will endorse that you should be fired both peers and bosses different levels of status that were low performers similar levels of performance right in terms of idiosyncrasy credits exactly the same percentage of people 19 endorsed that they should be fired however whenever we looked at high performers um that number for for bosses it didn't rise all that much just two percent of people suggested it whereas 31 of people suggested that if it was your peer who was a high performer you should fire them now again we do not know the mechanism of why this happens um that's something that we are thinking through and exploring right now but what we do know is that this is a dramatic gain right why is this happening is it because we want to keep people from becoming the boss and engaging in these behaviors or is it because that the boss themselves is sort of sheltered from um that increase in the likelihood of suggesting that they be fired either of those this is a correlation causation sort of thing i think but either of those is plausible um we need to spend more time thinking about and exploring what that mechanism really is so what we do find overall across the board is that idiosyncrasy credits of the agent of sexual harassment they do appear to have some impact on their responses to sexual harassment incidents and that those things were very different conclusions drawn about idiosyncrasy credits and the information derived from them differed pretty substantially depending on the stakeholder the person that was internal or external to the organization um and what their feelings were about the severity of the consequences um who should be in control of those changes so friends were more likely to direct the um actions toward the person who was harassed as opposed to the agent of harassment for instance and so now we arrived at kind of what's next um after this obviously there's a lot of things to explore there's a lot more in this data to explore frankly um we could spend more time coding and thinking through okay what are some mechanisms that we want to explore here and think through how people are making sense of sexual harassment incidents and how they're related to them as well as the other people that are involved in the circumstance but also what we want to spend um the next uh section of our time on this project is specifically in relation to troublemakers um and idiosyncrasy credits kelsey is super interested in troublemakers and the different kinds of troublemakers that we have in the workplace so sometimes those are people who are harassing right and sometimes people are labeled troublemakers for raising issues of sexual harassment and assault to other people so what we want to know is in that in those circumstances when these people bring up um sexual harassment incidents do they do their own idiosyncrasy credits come into play do those credits work in the same way for targets of harassment um likewise we would love to know if there are unique types of credits um and and kind of expand on our understanding of idiosyncrasy credits that apply just to the sexual harassment space um something that we've talked about previously that doesn't really occur in other circumstances is is there support for the person coming from somebody who's not involved in the circumstance are they writing a letter on their behalf um are they saying nice things about them um essentially you know is there some kind of backing or support for the person that would boost their idiosyncrasy credits um even in the face of severe severe consequences in the severe sexual harassment situation and third most interestingly and i think most importantly we are interested in interventions that reduce the impact of idiosyncrasy credits so this could be something like drawing attention to idiosyncrasy credits but that doesn't necessarily increase accountability as we well know from the bias literature so digging through that and thinking about what interventions have worked in the past and what might be applicable to this circumstance which is very different from a lot of the other literatures that have been applied to it how could that work how co ld we increase personal responsibility and increase accountability in the workplace and um thank you all again so much for being here i'd love to take questions if you would like to get in touch with either of us our contact info is here and we would really love to hear from you um this is something that we're both really passionate about understanding and applying to the workplace so we welcome new partners um anyone that we can act with and think more about these issues definitely open to it okay if you have a question go ahead and use the raise your hand feature and then i'll call on people as they raise their hands and you can unmute yourself and ask your question i do think we have one another question in the chat again from anna are you able to share the industries or sectors of your data set is it i.t or wider particularly interested in professions such as medicine law and accounting so this wasn't focused on a particular sector this the scenario itself was pulled from uber right in terms of engineering she was an engineer in that in that firm we have looked at data from the medical perspective um and the surgeon narratives um but this particular study was really just about how do people make sense of this writ large so um even people who have um experience and sexual harassment and handling those circumstances might still be impacted by things like idiosyncrasy credits without realizing and we just wanted to kind of get a foundation and see are these idiosyncrasy credits working in the same way as they do in other um and other situations so creative behavior um those other less controversial touchy subjects okay we have a couple more questions popping up in the chat from elad i hope i'm saying that right you lad um it he he asks for um the insider outsider effect you find suggests that friends may misinterpret what an insider would do are there differences in the importance people think others would assign to credits versus the effects they actually have leading them to give wrong advice yeah so i think this is a really critical thing to explore further in our work um i absolutely agree that friends might misinterpret um what hr is going to do maybe based on their own experiences in that circumstance or just you know what's on tv even so i think um that's absolutely right and that there is this disconnect between what we expect to happen and the advice that we give as a result i think me and kelsey have talked about this a little bit that that might contribute to perhaps under reporting um or other other circumstances which don't really aid in resolving the situation um but sort of perpetuating the idea that nothing will be done and you should stay far away from this now clearly that's not um that's not an unreasonable assumption to make at this juncture i think so there's a lot of entanglement um in terms of understanding why people are making these decisions what they know about what the job this person is if they really have all the information that they need to to provide advice all of these things i think are very um useful and interesting and very needed questions that we need to answer okay the next question is coming from julia she has her hand raised so julia go ahead and unmute and ask your question um thank you wow what an awesome presentation i really learned a lot and uh resonates a lot with what i've been seeing in the field i've been doing a qualitative field study of a public um lands management agency that had a a lot of issues around sexual harassment and assault and one thing i was really struck by your question at the end around are there idiosyncrasy credits directly related to specific to sexual harassment and one thing i wondered your thoughts on was around uh the perpetrator's relationship status that's something that's come up in my field work is this sense of like oh the you know it's been i'm thinking of the context of a male perpetrator and saying oh he's a married family man he has three kids like he wouldn't do that or it was misinterpreted and similar with the relationship status of the victim and bystanders especially if the victim is not coupled and not known to be coupled where they'll say oh i didn't intervene because i wasn't sure what the romantic like what their status was or they did it was it consensual but that that relationship status piece seemed to be coming up a lot and so i was curious your thoughts on that dynamic yeah absolutely and that is one of the ones that i actually meant to point out is that we might have these unique idiosyncrasy credits applied to the circumstance where it's like well he has a daughter you know or he's married to a woman and so um we definitely see examples of those things happening in real life and we want to know absolutely this is this is in our our wheelhouse we want to know if those things are considered idiosyncrasy credits if they build up the reputation and status of others where they fit into the paradigm of idiosyncrasy credits or if they're a unique kind of idiosyncrasy credit that only applies to sexual harassment i think that's absolutely a critical thing that we need to address especially because it is something that's brought up so frequently in relation to sexual harassment and misconduct incidents i think that's a fantastic observation um i'm i'm heartened but also sad to hear that this resonates so much with with your field work um but i i think i think that's absolutely right yeah thank you next year we have a comment from michael except of idiosyncrasy credits reminds him of more um the concept of moral licensing um the literature explores the idea that exhibiting past socially desirable behaviors licenses or credits people to subsequently exhibit socially undesirable behaviors um so it's just a comment um suggesting maybe that's an additional literature for you to look at yeah absolutely um moral licensing moral disengagement um we think that those are going to be really helpful for understanding sort of the underlying mechanisms that might lead people to make sense of things in the way that they do and again to kind of balance out those idiosyncrasy credits i've banked this amount amount of time amount of effort amount of status and so yes i made this one mistake but all of those things should should counteract that should counteract the penalties that i would get for that i think that's that's a a fantastic suggestion and definitely one that we're gonna take you up on all right i have a question for you um so um just for anybody who might not be aware of the concept um i'm interested in how identity commitment might play out in these scenarios so identity commitment is the idea that who i am other people depend on me to hold an identity so i have to continue um acting out enacting this identity in my workplace because my colleagues or my boss or somebody else the customers might depend on me to be this person or to act in this way and i think you might be able to think about identity commitment from the harasser's point of view so the harasser must maybe has some credits because other so many other people depend on that person to continue you know being employed or being in their position of authority or also the bystanders so maybe my identity and maybe maybe i'm not kind of person who rocks the boat and maybe a lot of people depend on me to be sort of this neutral person in the workplace so i can't speak out against harassment have you thought about more of the relational dynamics that might play out in terms of who depends on who and the strength of different relationships we have um but we haven't really considered it from that perspective and i think that idea of identity commitment is really interesting um specifically in the ways that you noted right that i i care about these other people that i work with they're going to be impacted by my behaviors um i don't want to put them in a bad spot i think all of these sorts of of things maybe are running through the mind of somebody who has to decide um in many cases to whistle blow or to bring up these accusations about themselves right about somebody who has uh harassed them that that they they have to to kind of handle those identity commitments that they have and how does how do the idiosyncrasy credits play a role in in in understanding how maybe they place some weight on certain kinds of identity commitments and not so much on others i think that's a fantastic idea shannon so maybe we could get you on board that's great um do we have any other questions from anyone else and if you're looking for the raise your hand button it is pretty towards the bottom of your screen where you can turn your microphone on and off you'll see a little icon of a person raising their hand or feel free to type something in the chat box and i can read it so jennifer while we're waiting to see if anyone else has a question you mentioned that you're going to be collecting additional data are you um just doing a sort of a replication study or are you adding more hypotheses to your data collection our current project is really to look at um this which i had mentioned um this this first part up here so do the credits work in the same way for the targets of harassment is there a kind of battle between high performers right who wins out when when both the person who's harassed is is a stellar performer and the person who's harassing them as a stellar performer um you know who wins in that in that kind of battle and we're really interested in understanding that because it might explain some of the strange behaviors that organizations have engaged in or these strange policies that they have about who is rewarded and who is penalized um who is promoted and who gets transferred you know those sorts of maybe more hr focused um decisions and understanding again the the relational impact i think that it's been brought up is really critical to answering those kinds of questions um so right now we're focused on again sort of thinking about these idiosyncrasy credits in the context of the person who gets harassed um to or to understand more about the the context but i'm i'm clearly gonna gonna focus on this relational stuff after after we gather this data to understand more about um especially identity commitments i think that's really fascinating um and digging more into the moral disengagement and licensing uh literature is definitely something that's on our to-do list it would be interesting to see if just the mere fact that someone is harassment bankrupts some of their credits um especially if the participants endorse sexual harassment myths people make false claims of sexual harassment or um or if they have strong beliefs in a just world so you know things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people that would be interesting to see if you have the if you just swap the people just the fact that you're the target maybe makes you have fewer credits to cash in on right so understanding why people um perhaps target someone and the consequences of that like you said what are the consequences of being a target of harassment we really frequently hear you know um how did you provoke this and frankly that was that was also included as a response to um the internal perspective for sexual harassment um for a number of people actually they they wanted to know you know well what what what provoked this obviously she had to have said something there's no way that somebody would just bring this up out of the blue so understanding those kinds of um of elements of the situation is also really critical for understanding the bigger picture any other questions from the participants feel free to put it in the chat or raise your hand then okay if you do have any questions for um jennifer after the session her email is on the screen you can also feel free to email um the svrc group if you're a member of that um i'm going to go over and switch back to my slides to close out the section thanks to everybody who's here thanks to you shannon i have a great time talking a little bit about our work and thank you so much for all of your comments and suggestions i i absolutely am really grateful for them and i'm sure that kelsey is as well yes and thank you you know it's great very thought-provoking um so just to close out this session i want to preview what we have going on next month on november 19th um same time we'll start at 3 30 eastern and we'll have hope on presenting judgments regarding sex-based harassment of uppity women and wimpy men the influence of social identity and moral disengagement so something that might actually be relevant to your work um so this will be another working paper presentation and if you would like the link to join that session in your calendar invitations go ahead and type your email in the chat now i think most participants are already on my email list and are already getting the calendar invites but if you're not please feel free to share your email in the chat box now and i'll get you added to that and uh with that thank you so much everybody for joining in today and we hope to see you on november 19th