Pay It Forward:
How we can kill the Queen Bee and help the next generation of public relations practitioners get ahead
This research was conducted for the Gender and Communications course, part of my Masters in Public Relations, Mount Saint Vincent University.
Abstract
I have felt the sting of a Queen Bee; a female executive who has made it in a man’s world by taking on many of the attributes of the male-dominated work culture. She does the aspiring professional, and other women, no favours and the sting can be felt long after leaving the organization. There’s evidence to suggest that the Queen Bee phenomenon is dead and that there are other solutions to offer a hand-up to young professionals of both genders, including mentoring and role modelling. These two support strategies can have an impact on confidence and career, and ultimately the bottom-line. And in the public relations profession where the majority are women, yet so few are making it to the top ranks, these strategies are also critical to shattering the glass ceiling. This discussion paper combines research with my own professional narrative to answer the question: how can we as public relations leaders, be it in business or academia, utilize an understanding of Queen Bee syndrome and its negative impact to instead provide positive and effective mentorship and role modelling for aspiring public relations professionals, regardless of gender? By paying it forward, men and women alike can help young professionals advance in their careers, and perhaps in the process open the possibility for greater gender equality and less gender bias.
Meet the Queen Bee
“You can’t expect us to hold your job for you,” my boss said flatly and without eye contact as I sat across from her, 30-weeks pregnant, in September 2004. She’d called me in for a meeting to tell me that when I returned from my one-year maternity leave, I would be “rotated into another job.”
Four weeks later, I was back in my boss’ office. “Wow, are you ever getting fat,” she quipped. Incidentally, she was the head of human resources. At this meeting, a new career plan unfolded. One I was not expecting. “We could offer you a package,” she said, “to make your mat leave more comfortable.”
Ok, I thought, now I’m insulted. She knew my husband brought home less income than I did.
“But you’d have to decide now.” It was then that the axis of my world shifted, and would never be the same.
(Lindell, Five Year Napper: Book proposal, 2012)
Meet my former boss, Marg (name changed). Queen Bee. A woman who had climbed the corporate ladder amongst a male-dominated patriarchal bully culture and by every measure a successful — though rare — female leader. Yet she seemed hell-bent on preventing any of her female direct reports from similar success, erecting roadblocks after insult after intimidation to eventually force me to leave. Here’s just a few gems from Marg: when I was nominated for Canada’s Top 40 Under 40: “who nominated you?!” she barked; when I appeared on CBC Venture to talk about work-life balance: “it’s time to become a good company man,” she ordered; and when I questioned her on why she gave the same task to two of her reports: “I believe in the law of the jungle”.
Why did Marg act the way she did and is this an isolated incident? As a student, practitioner and professor of public relations, I wanted to explore the Queen Bee phenomenon and if it exists in the profession that is made up of 72 per cent women, yet only 30 per cent rise to top management positions (The Holmes Group, 2014). This discussion paper, presented as a series of blog posts and sharing my own professional and personal narrative, will explore Queen Bee syndrome and its impact on female employees’ rise to the top. It will prove that yes, it is real and why, but will argue that it need not be the primary and unfortunate sense of reality for aspiring women, especially knowing that 80 to 90 per cent of students enrolled in public relations programs are women (at my college in Fall 2016, it was about 90 per cent). A number of solutions have been offered to help other women advance in public relations: from mentoring (Dozier, Grunig, & Grunig, 1995; Krawcheck, 2017; Lean In, 2017); to the creation of female networks (Grunig, Toth, & Hon, 2001; Hon, 1995; The Organization of Canadian Women in PR, 2016); to sponsorship (Krawcheck, 2017; Lean In, 2017); to the creation of women-led public relations firms as ‘open collar’ entrpreneurs (Grunig, Toth, & Hon, 2001). For the purposes of this paper, I am going to explore mentoring and role modelling as practical solutions. As a caveat to this discussion, I bring to this paper an inherent bias as a “white, heterosexual, able-bodied professional” (Golombisky, 2015, p. 390), an approach taken by many feminist public relations’ scholars. As such, I do not explore the impact of similar situations on intersectional identifications. I also use a social contructivist view of gender.
As female leaders in the profession — and I include myself in that category — we owe it to our profession and those beginning their careers to utilize an understanding of Queen Bee syndrome to instead offer a hand-up and pay it forward — to help rather than hinder — through mentoring and role modelling, which I will describe and discuss in this series. I would also argue that at this point in feminist evolution, that a mentor or role model need not be the same gender as the protégé; that both males and females (and everyone else along the spectrum) can contribute to creating a culture of career-inspiration rather than a culture of career-frustration. Queen Bee syndrome doesn’t have to exist; as female leaders in the public relations industry, we owe it to the next generation of public relations professionals, regardless of gender, to mentor and role model.
The Sting of the Queen Bee
Knowing and understanding negative influences and obstacles to one’s career growth is an important first step before so we can move away from it and create a new system of support. When I first read about Queen Bee, I finally realized I wasn’t alone, nor was my unkind boss. Queen Bee Syndrome is “the worst kind of critic women can face…She’s the woman who has been successful, but she seems allergic to doing anything to help other women reach the top” (Krawcheck, 2017, p. 89). The phenomenon is named after the ritual found in nature whereby one queen bee runs the hive and kills the other female bees to eliminate the competition. The Queen Bee is often your boss, and not only do they not support you, they undermine you as well. It’s not a new concept; the term Queen Bee Syndrome, used to define successful women’s “discrimination against other women” (Wrigley, 2005, p. 11), was developed by researchers Jayaratne, Staines and Travis in 1974. The Workplace Bullying Institute (WBI) labels it woman-on-woman bullying, or WOW, and identifies that women are targeted by female bullies 71 per cent of the time compared to male bullies at 46 per cent; 29 per cent of ALL workplace bullying is women on women (WBI, 2009), but it is largely ignored by the media because “it’s discounted as routine, expected and predictable” (WBI, para. 5).
I painted a picture of what it looked like for me; and it fits into all of the categories of the syndrome’s exhibited behaviours, as outlined in a 2016 article in The Atlantic (Cooper, 2016): a woman disparaging typically feminine traits (“you are getting SOOOO fat” when I was pregnant); to emphasizing her own masculine attributes (“I’m a ball breaker”); to seeing claims of gender discrimination as baseless (“you can’t expect us to hold your job for you”) and being unsupportive of initiatives to address gender inequity. This is my corporate story.
There is no doubt in my experience that Queen Bee is real. In the public relations profession, it also exists. In-depth interviews conducted with 20 women working in public relations and communications management in the U.S. auto industry, revealed that 14 of the 20 participants experienced Queen Bee syndrome and gender discrimination was attributed to a competitiveness reinforced by the fact that there were fewer leadership positions for women (Wrigley, 2005). In academia, a study of male and female professors recognized the phenomenon in the way that female professors treated female PhD students and attributed it to a bitterness that the older female professors had because they had to make choices between their academic career and having a family; this came at the expense of working collectively with women at the university to make change to achieve equal opportunities (Ellemers, et al, 2012).
The negative impact of Queen Bee, or the ‘corporate bitch’ is well-documented: Unsupportive bosses are a direct reason women in PR are held back (Grunig, Toth, & Hon, 2001); it as one of the top five factors behind negotiated resignation, the psychological process by which women in public relations come to terms with a glass ceiling (Wrigley, 2002). Psychologically, and speaking from experience, the affects — anger and resentment — are much deeper.
Queen Bee and Gender Identity
Queen Bee is more a product of being in a male-dominated culture where women are devalued than something wicked in their personality. It actually has more to do with their gender identity and gender bias: “Queen Bee dynamics are triggered by gender discrimination …. when women for whom being a woman is not a central aspect of their identity experience gender bias, Queen Bee behavior emerges” (Cooper, 2016, para. 11). That’s because women like my boss think gender should be irrelevant at work; they made it to their level by taking on more masculine qualities and downplaying their gender identity to mirror the same leadership qualities as the men, where aggression was rewarded and abuse seen as the path to promotion (Ellemers et al, 2012; WBI, 2009). At the heart of the matter, is an organizational structure and environment more conducive to men having greater power and influence (Golombisky, 2015), and the Queen Bees have found a way to survive in that environment, rather than trying to change “unjust systems and power structures” (Golombisky, 2015, p. 400), as the Radical Feminists prescribed.
Simply put: “Queen Bees have made it in a man’s world” (Wrigley, 2005, p. 12). This is where the Liberal Feminists did us no favours in my opinion: out of the second wave of feminism during the 1970s, when women were beginning to infiltrate the corporate hierarchy (Harragan, 1977), it was argued that for equality, women needed to be like men (Golombisky, 2015). Indeed, the first book I read when I began my career in 1990 was Harragan’s (1977) Games Mother Never Taught You that offered advice on how to dress, behave and even speak in the male patriarchal organization. Certainly, this was the observed norm in the places I worked. In the early 2000s, in the organization where I was Queen Bee’d, the women in management positions had more masculine than feminine qualities: from the way that they dressed to the way they kept their hair and the way they talked, all were reflective of the male culture and not their female identity. Eventually, I too, learned to “be a good company man” as I was instructed to do by my Queen Bee.
But here’s the catch: “Repeated discrimination against other women has caused Queen Bees to believe they have actual power…While Queen Bees think and act like males, they are still in the minority in terms of biological gender. Their male peers are aware of this and control the game” (Wrigley, 2005, p. 13). “Queen Bees have risen to the top because they are not a threat to the males in charge; they buy into masculine values, easing males’ consciences while maintaining the power structure” (Wrigley, 2005, p. 12). As such, they feel that if they help other women — especially young, smart females who quickly escalated to vice president status at the age of 32 — those women may want to “change the rules for the organization” (Wrigley, 2005, p. 12). The Queen Bee bullies because she ultimately sees you as a threat and competition for one of the few jobs for women in the C-suite (Krawcheck, 2017). And in a profession like public relations where only a third of all senior management is female, we can see the threat is real.
Besides being threatened, other explanations for Queen behavior are that perhaps she is behaving the same as how a Queen Bee treated her in the past; or she feels women should struggle up the corporate ladder as she once had to, when there were fewer women, more barriers and more sexism (Cooper, 2016). Whatever the case, this does a great disservice to all women, not just the one being bullied. When a woman presents a stereotypical opinion of another woman, it’s viewed as an unbiased assessment, with the rationale and assumption that women can’t be biased against members of their own gender (Cooper, 2016). Or as one male boss of mine once called it, “support for the sisterhood.” All women, therefore, are seen as deserving of bullying, and/or undeserving of promotion.
The Bee anecdote: The Righteous Woman
As a female recognized nearly a decade ago for my leadership, I feel a certain duty to make an impact, especially when it comes to women in the workplace. … as a teacher of mostly female students (most PRs are women), I do get to be a catalyst. I am influencing the female leaders of tomorrow. They are here. In my class. I know who they are and they will go far. They are the ones who will make a difference in the workplace, who will break the rules and make new ones, who will question status quo and demand a status change. (Lindell, Confessions of a communications teacher, 2012)
Others have recently argued that Queen Bee Syndrome doesn’t exist anymore, that the Queen Bee is dead. Facebook COO and Lean In champion Sheryl Sandberg and researcher Adam Grant (2016) argue that when women become chief executives, more women end up in senior management than if the CEO is male; same on boards of directors; same in politics. Their premise: “As more women advance in the workplace, queen bees will go the way of the fax machine” (Sandberg & Grant, 2016, para. 15). This is backed by findings of a Catalyst (2012) study: 73 per cent of women in the workplace are developing women, compared to 30 per cent of men. That’s good to learn; it’s been 12 years since I left that company and my Queen Bee has since retired. Maybe we’ve evolved enough to recognize Madeleine Albright’s quote: “there’s a special place in hell for women who do not help other women”. But what would I say to my 35-year-old self who experienced Queen Bee? What do I tell my 20-something students who look to me and say: “I want the career you had” (and some do)! As Krawcheck (2017) advises: Call her out. Speak up and call out when you see it happening to others. Kill the Queen Bee. More importantly, I would say: “it’s time to be a good company WOMAN! Be Righteous!”
Yes, there’s a name for this archetype as well: The Righteous Woman, who “is ideal, a belief that women have a distinct moral obligation to have one another’s backs” (Cooper, 2016, para. 2). We need women who strongly identify more as women, who turn any gender discrimination and sexism into a superpower rather than kryptonite: “This heightened awareness should lead women to foster alliances and actively support one another” (Cooper, 2016, para. 2). This is certainly supported in the research of Wrigley (2005), who argues that women can offer each other the kind of validation and support they need to feel empowered to lead. Women who help women is good for all of us (Catalyst, 2012; Krawcheck, 2017); and ultimately it puts us on the path to equality in the workplace.
Righteous women are not unlike the ‘helpers’ Grunig, Toth, and Hon (2001) described as “good communicators who are empowering, risk-takers, skilled delegators, bright, honest and open” (p. 106). These leaders typically make good mentors who can act as teacher and cheerleader for a more junior staffer, for guidance and skill development (Grunig et al, 2001). “Without the example — and helping hand — from senior women who have made it, not only will women resist entering management, but management will also believe women don’t want any part of management” (Wrigley, 2005, p. 20). It’s the ultimate lead-by-example; show us the way, just don’t shout out directions.
Mentors Wanted: In Academia
WHY do I teach? I choose to teach to make a meaningful difference in the lives of others. Teaching affords me the opportunity to inspire and lead, to mentor and challenge, to provide context and confidence and to build excitement for the opportunity that lies ahead for these students. (Lindell, Why I teach, 2013)
In my role as professor, I have an opportunity to mentor, as do other professors of public relations, particularly those who have experience in industry and are now giving back to the profession and paying it forward. The word mentor comes from Greek mythology; Odysseus entrusted his son to an old man called ‘Mentor’ to guide him on a 10-year journey (Merriam, 1983). History is full of similar examples of a relationship between an older and younger person, built on trust and the experience of the older guiding the younger. It is not lost on me that as a former ‘Canada’s Top 40 Under 40’ that 40 seems to be the magic age at which time “the successful become mentors themselves” (Merriam, 1983, p. 163). I’m over 40, so inherently that means it’s time for me to step up.
In academia, Merriam (1983) explains that “learning experiences are central to the mentor-protégé relationship. Wise by virtue of being older and more experienced, the mentor guides and cultivates the intellect of the younger learner [and]….. seeks advancement for the student in order to enhance the field and the student’s role in it” (p. 167). This all sounds good on paper, but in reality, the body of research on the value of mentorships in academia is inconclusive and admittedly, biased in favour of the phenomenon but it leaves out the important detail that both mentor and protégé must actually like each other and want to work together (Merriam, 1983). Forced relationships do not work. The key, therefore, may be a commitment to create a support system that lasts well beyond the semester, or the program, throughout the lifetime of both mentor and protégé. This approach is impossible for every student, but certainly one that I support throught continued contact and openness to promising students made easier though social media connections and the ability to reach out anytime for counsel and support. Some of my students are starting to have famillies of their own, and I genuinely hope that they turn to me for support and learnings from my own experiences trying to balance career and children.
Mentoring in Business: Does Gender Matter?
“You know more than they do about this.” — Les. Les had so many great quotes, but this one was instrumental to my confidence and my career. Les was the kind of leader and mentor who believed in the people he hired more than the people he hired believed in themselves. And by people, I mean me. (Lindell, Career Advice that has stood the test of time, 2014)
All throughout my career, I’ve never really had a mentor, or even a good female role model. I have developed and adopted those attributes that I liked and that I saw working and vowed not to take on the attributes that I found offensive and arrogant: a composite of the best of the best. (Lindell, My new reverse mentor, 2010)
In business, much has been written about the value of mentorship. It is considered one of the most impactful initiatives for increasing diversity and inclusion in the workplace (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016). But does it really matter if the mentorship is male-female or female-female? Does gender make a difference on the effectiveness and value of the relationship? Two studies (Pompper & Adams, 2006; Sosik & Godshalk, 1999) explore the dynamics according to gender with very similar findings. Pompper and Adams (2006) specifically look at the public relations profession, and find that with respect to gender, “mentoring reflects and perpetuates gendered social roles” (p. 314). Females in the study thought of mentoring as a way to help reduce anxiety and stress, while males viewed mentoring as an opportunity to advance their career. Women mentors are viewed to offer greater psycho-social support through role modelling and friendship, while male mentors offer greater levels of career support through assignments, networking, coaching and visibility (Pompper & Adams, 2006).
Forty years ago, a study (Henning & Jardim, 1977) of 25 women executives, all who had a male boss as mentor, concluded that all women wanting to advance “look for a coach, a godfather or a godmother, a mentor, an advocate, someone in a more senior position who can teach… support… advise… critique” (p. 162). Not surprisingly, it was a Les, a male executive consultant, who hired me to the corporation and saw that I was promoted to assistant vice president from director, and another senior male executive, John, who later promoted me to vice president at the age of 32. John made sure I got in front of the executive committee often to pitch initiatives, giving me invaluable visibilty. Indeed, they both provided crucial career support as the two previously mentioned studies support. “Receiving mentorship from senior males can increase compensation and career progress satisfaction for women, particularly for those working in male-dominated industries” (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016); certainly true in my case. But what was sorely lacking for me, were the benefits of a having a female mentor, someone who could provide me with that psycho-social support. It was a fatal flaw in the system; even if the protégé attains the career advancement, without the corresponding emotional supports, the advancement can turn into a liability. About a year after becoming vice president, I was told by my new boss, a female, that I may have been promoted “too soon” and rather than providing me with a mentor, guide or sponsor, I was sent to an executive development bootcamp and assigned an executive coach.
This male-female mentoring model is changing as women advance. Based on a longitudinal study of high-potential talent conducted between Fall 2007 and Spring 2010, and based on responses from 742 respondents, the women-in-business advocacy group and think-tank Catalyst reported that women [65 per cent], more than men [56 per cent] are helping others move up the ladder. “High-potential talent who were themselves mentored, coached, or sponsored to advance their careers are more likely to ‘pay it forward’ by developing the next generation of leaders” (Catalyst, 2012, para. 1). The key takeaway is that no matter the gender, both men and women need opportunities not only for career mentoring, but psycho-social support as well. The two are no longer mutually exclusive as the modern workplace evolves. Men are now equally concerned and desirous of a family life; nearly 50 per cent of millennial men say that being a good parent is one of the most important things in their lives (Slaughter, 2015). This is supported by Berger and Meng (2009) as well as Sosik and Godshalk (1999), who concluded their research with the recommendation that organizations develop and deliver training modules for mentors to address issues critical to the success of cross-gender mentorships, such as gender differences, sexual harrassment, and transformational leadership. Success also depends on compatibility between the two parties and ensuring that formalized mentoring programs are supported by the organization’s values and structures (Pompper & Adams, 2006).
Successful cross-gendering mentorships also need what’s called an ally mentality, whereby allies are dominant group members who work to end prejudice by supporting the non-dominant group (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016). In a public relations agency that is dominated by women, that may mean a senior female account director mentoring a male coordinator. In the corporate world, it usually takes the form of a male champions. In a Harvard Business Review (2016) study of 75 male and female leaders in Fortune 500 companies, researchers concluded that: “male champions have learned that gender inclusiveness means involving both men and women in advancing women’s leadership. Although many organizations have attempted to fight gender bias by focusing on women — offering training programs or networking groups specifically for them … any solutions that involve only 50% of the human population are likely to have limited success” (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016, para. 6).
I couldn’t agree more. That’s why it irks me to see new organzations like The Organization for Canadian Women in Pubic Relations sprouting up as “the only organization across Canada dedicated to advancing women in public relations” (The Organization of Canadian Women in PR, 2016). The solution doesn’t depend on putting women in a room full of other women, but rather in a space where both genders are welcome.
Wrapping up mentoring, I want to emphasize the benefits to the public relations profession. Professional associations including the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), the Canadian Public Relations Society (CPRS) recognize mentoring and student membership as important for professional development and have opportunities to support the connection of mentor to protégé. Mentoring can also be a supplement to college training (Pompper & Adams, 2006). At the college where I teach, that’s why we offer field placements as a required component of our program as well as opportunites to work with actual clients on real campaigns. I’m also big fan of the ‘reverse mentor’ and firmly believe we have as much to learn from the digital-savvy 20-somethings as they can from the experienced ‘elders’. When all of this is approached with gender inclusiveness, the benefits go well beyond the individual. Leaders who ‘get it’ can use their authority to advance their workplace culture towards gender parity, and when that happens, so does improved profitabilty (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016).
What is a Role Model?
What is a role model? Those who lead by example …. anyone who passes along wisdom… living your life with your values intact. (Lindell, Defining a role model: From the archives, 2014)
I am fully aware of the added weight I bear because I am a woman teaching mostly young women. They look to me as a role model and it is not a task I take lightly. (Lindell, Why I teach, 2013)
Now, let’s explore the role model. The term ‘role model’ was first used by sociologist Robert Merton as part of Merton’s theory (1968/1949) of units of social structure. He argued that “individuals compared themselves with groups who held social roles to which they aspired, and these roles were accompanied by a set of expected behaviours which others might emulate in order to achieve their goals” (Berger & Meng, 2009, p. 13). According to Sosik and Godshalk (1999), “role modelling behaviour is generally defined with respect to protégés’ reactions (i.e. attributions) to the mentor, as well as to the mentor’s behaviour” (p. 110). Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory describes how “most human behavour is learned observationally through modeling” (p. 22). Mentors can be important role models, but not all mentors are positive role models, attributed to the fact there may be a power imbalance and/or gender issues, for example.
Berger and Meng (2009) identified common role model attributes identified by public relations practitioners: open-mindedness to other’s ideas; giving credit to others; being enthusiastic; bringing out talent in others; upholding strong values in every situation; and being a genuine communicator: what typically could be described as female attributes. Any woman or man needs to consciously think about these attributes and how they can pay it forward and role model behaviours that can lead to success in the profession. For me, in front of my students, it means demonstrating professionalism, ethics and integrity, offering opportunities for leadership and not hiding the fact that I work hard to balance family and work (and school).
Now What? Are we Gladiators or are we Bitches?!
We ALL need to be part of the solution: that women who chose to live the corporate life, to “Lean In” as Sheryl Sandberg calls it, not judge those who dare to make alternative lifestyle decisions; that corporations work on being a tad more accommodating in exchange for a happier employee who consequently will be more productive in the long run (and more loyal); and that men take ownership of this issue, too. A family is made up of two consenting adults and no one part of that family compact should bear the full burden of responsibilities for finances, child rearing, household administration, and yes, chores…. in a week, I start full-time as a college professor, an occupation that . . . many of the opted-out women turned to after years off with children. So, I’m a statistic. I’m happy with this new role, this new trajectory of my career: it is a values-based career and one in which I can influence the future female leaders in decisions they will make with respect to their own careers (Lindell, I’m one of many: The opt-out generation wants back In, 2013).
Twelve years after my Queen Bee told me that I couldn’t expect her to hold my job for me, I still feel the sting of her mean. I suppose I had two choices, to go back and fight back against the endemic corporate bully culture where woman who acted like men made it to the top, or I could move on and find the career where I could impact change on those about to enter the profession. Olivia Pope, the assertive career woman on the TV-series Scandal often asks: “Are we Gladiators or are we Bitches?!” I could have also gone back and become a Queen Bee, a corporate bitch, myself, and clawed my way up, become that “good company man”. But I chose to be a Gladiator: to pay it forward with both opportunities for mentoring and daily demonstration of role modelling. The research is all there: women helping women, men helping women, and women helping men — champions can change organizational cultures, bring about gender parity in the workplace (both in management positions and salary), push back on gender stereotypes, and increase diversity and inclusion at work overall; this leads to increased compensation, career satisfaction and confidence for the aspiring individual; and ultimately, greater financial performance for the organization and (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016). And, as Golombisky (2015) argues, this paves the way for those of us in the profession — be it “scholars, teachers, researchers, practitioners or some combination thereof, [to assemble] collaborative alliances to effect social transformation” (p. 409). Working together, we can function as Third Wave Feminists and be agents of change, to be Gladiators.
Of course, one of the the most effective weapons for the Gladiator is awareness. “Organizations that do not embrace diversity will not survive” (Wrigley, 2005, p. 25). Why? Math. “Evidence already suggests that patriarchal cultures create less excellent communication departments, and weak communication departments in turn lead to unsuccessful organizations. Unsuccessful organizations do not generate enough revenue and eventually, all employees, even those with power, will be unemployed” (Wrigley, 2005, pp. 25–26). This is not a woman thing and women alone cannot fix the structural faults of organizations or society. “Awareness by both sexes is step one” (Wrigley, 2005, p. 27). Both — all — genders need to be part of the solution. I hope that this series of blog posts and my story generates this kind of awareness to stimulate discussion on how we can, together, impact change, simply by being better humans than the ones that came before us. And for that, I suppose, I should thank Marg.
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
Berger, B., & Meng, J. (2009). Role modelling in public relations: The influence of role models and mentors on leadership beliefs and qualities. 12th Annual International Public Relations Research (pp. 10–25). Miami: Heyman Associates, Inc.
Catalyst. (2012, June 1). Paying it forward pays back for business leaders: Developing others pays off in career growth — and reveals no queen bees here, Catalyst study finds. Retrieved February 18, 2017, from Catalyst: http://www.catalyst.org/media/paying-it-forward-pays-back-business-leaders
Cooper, M. (2016, June 23). The myth of the Queen Bee: Why women (sometimes) don’t help other women. Retrieved January 17, 2017, from The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/queen-bee/488144/
Dozier, D., Grunig, L., & Grunig, J. (1995). Manager’s guide to excellence in public relations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Ellemers, N., Rink, F., Derks, B., & Ryan, M. (2012). Women in high places: When and why promoting women into top positions can harm them individually or as a group (and how to prevent this). Research in Organizational Behaviour, 32, 163–187.
Golombisky, K. (2015). Renewing the commitments of feminist public relations theory from Velvet Ghetto to social justice. Journal of Public Relations Research, 27(5), 389–415.
Grunig, L., Toth, E., & Hon, L. (2001). Women in public relations: How gender influences practice. New York: The Guilford Press.
Harragan, B. (1977). Games mother never taught you: Corporate gamesmanship for women. New York: Warner Books.
Henning, M., & Jardim, A. (1977). The managerial woman. New York: Basic Books.
Hon, L. (1995). Towards a feminist theory of public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 7(1), 27–88.
Jayratne, T., Staines, G., & Travis, C. (1974). The Queen Bee Syndrome. Psychology Today, 55–60.
Krawcheck, S. (2017). Own it: The power of women at work. New York: Crown Business.
Lean In. (2017, March 7). 4 things all mentors and mentees should know. Retrieved March 20, 2017, from Lean In: https://leanin.org/tips/mentorship
Lindell, D. (2010, February 10). My new reverse mentor. Retrieved March 3, 2017 from Five Year Napper: http://fiveyearnapper.blogspot.ca/2010/02/my-new-reverse-mentor.html
Lindell, D. (2012, December 12). Confessions of a communications teacher. Retrieved March 3, 2017 from Five Year Napper: http://fiveyearnapper.blogspot.ca/2012/12/confessions-of-communications-teacher.html
Lindell, D. (2012, October 4). Five Year Napper: Book proposal. Book Draft. Toronto, ON: unpublished.
Lindell, D. (2013, August 12). I’m one of many: The opt-out generation wants back In. Retrieved February 28, 2017 from Five Year Napper: http://fiveyearnapper.blogspot.ca/2013/08/im-one-of-many-opt-out-generation-wants.html
Lindell, D. (2013, May 22). Why I teach. Retrieved February 28, 2017 from Five Year Napper: http://fiveyearnapper.blogspot.ca/2013/05/why-i-teach.html
Lindell, D. (2014, January 29). Career Advice that has stood the test of time. Retrieved February 27, 2017 from Five Year Napper: http://fiveyearnapper.blogspot.ca/2014/01/career-advice-that-has-stood-test-of.html
Lindell, D. (2014, February 8). Defining a role model: From the archives. Retrieved February 28, 2017 from Five Year Napper: http://fiveyearnapper.blogspot.ca/2013/02/defining-role-model-from-archives.html
Merriam, S. (1983). Mentors and proteges: A critical review of the literature. Adult Education Quarterly, 33(3), 161–173.
Merton, R. (1968/1949). Social theory and social structure. New York: The Free Press.
Pompper, D., & Adams, J. (2006). Under the microscope: Gender and mentor-protege relationships. Public Relations Review, 32, 309–315.
Sandberg, S., & Grant, A. (2016, June 23). Sheryl Sandberg on the myth of the Catty Woman. Retrieved February 11, 2017, from NYTimes: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/23/opinion/sunday/sheryl-sandberg-on-the-myth-of-the-catty-woman.html
Slaughter, A.-M. (2015). Unfinished business. New York: Random House.
Sosik, J., & Godshalk, V. (1999). The role of gender in mentoring: Implications for diversified and homogenous mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 101–122.
The Holmes Group. (2014). 2014 World PR Report. The Holmes Report. Los Angeles: University of Southern California’s Centre for Public Relations.
The Organization of Canadian Women in PR. (2016). About Us. Retrieved February 19, 2017, from The Organization of Canadian Women in PR: http://womeninpr.ca/about-us/
The Workplace Bullying Institute. (2009, May 20). Women-on-women bullying. Retrieved February 11, 2017, from Workplace Bullying Institute: http://www.workplacebullying.org/wow-bullying/
Valerio, A., & Sawyer, K. (2016, December 7). The men who mentor women. Retrieved February 19, 2017, from Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/2016/12/the-men-who-mentor-women
Wrigley, B. (2002). Glass ceiling? What glass ceiling? A qualitative study of how women view the glass ceiling in public relations management. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(1), 27–55.
Wrigley, B. (2005). What’s the buzz?: The Queen Bee Syndrome in public relations. International Communication Association 55th Annual Conference (pp. 1–30). New York: Feminist Scholarship Division.