Building Professional Credibility

There is a strong belief that women are more generous, and care more about equality, than men. Also, many people believe that women tend to be underconfident. None of these beliefs are true, two recent papers find. One paper —nicely titled "Men are from Mars, and Women Too"— focuses on self-confidence. The paper starts by surveying hundreds of experts, finding that 77% of them think that women are underconfident whereas men are overconfident. Next they do a comprehensive survey of all experimental tests of self-confidence that have been published in the past twenty years. The key result: 72% of all studies find that *both* women and men are overconfident. Only 18% of published studies support the commonly held view. The other paper considers social preferences. "Using data from 15 studies and 8,979 individuals" the paper finds "that women are believed to be more generous and more equality-oriented than men. [...] Yet this believed gender gap is largely inaccurate." The authors "find little to no evidence for gender differences in behavior or attitudes relating to social preferences". Hence, women and men are much more similar than commonly thought. Sure, people differ in their social preferences and self-confidence, and actually differences can be quite substantially. But gender is not predictive of such differences. Why is this important to know? Why is it important to correct these misperceptions about women and men? One reason is that misperceptions may affect selection and sorting in the labor market, in politics, and in society at large, resulting in a misallocation of talents and traits. For instance, if people think that to be a good leader one needs to have sufficient self-confidence, they may be biased against women, as they mistakenly believe that women tend to be underconfident. Likewise, people may be biased against men when selecting for positions that require generosity and care, mistakenly thinking that these qualities are mainly or only present among women. Read the full papers here (all open access!): Oriana Bandiera, Nidhi Parekh, Barbara Petrongolo, and Michelle Rao (2022), Men are from Mars, and Women Too: A Bayesian Meta-analysis of Overconfidence Experiments, Economica: https://lnkd.in/e6_dMRyG Christine Exley, Oliver Hauser, Molly Moore, and John-Henry Pezzuto (2024), Believed Gender Differences in Social Preferences, Quarterly Journal of Economics, forthcoming: https://lnkd.in/ecZCS2er And see also: Esther-Mirjam Sent and Irene van Staveren (2019), A Feminist Review of Behavioral Economic Research on Gender Differences, Feminist Economics: https://lnkd.in/ejJ8S6iX

How to sell (without feeling salesy): First, understand the Ethical Wealth Formula: (Value First × Trust Building) × Authentic Positioning  ———————————————��———  Frequency of Asks × Pressure Tactics This isn't abstract theory. It's practical math: • Increase the numerator: deliver more value, build more trust, position more authentically • Decrease the denominator: reduce frequency of asks, eliminate pressure tactics • Watch revenue soar while your integrity remains intact Ethical doesn't mean unprofitable. It means sustainable. Principle 1: Value-First Monetization The approach that generates $864,000 monthly without a single "hard sell": • Deliver so much value upfront that buying feels like the obvious next step • Create free content so good people say "If this is free, imagine what's paid" • Solve small problems for free, big transformational problems for a fee Give until it feels slightly uncomfortable. Then give a little more. Principle 2: Trust Through Consistency I've never missed weekly content in 3 years, through vacations, illnesses, market crashes. The trust-building machine that works while you sleep: • Show up reliably when competitors disappear during tough times • Do what you promise, when you promise it • Maintain quality across every touchpoint One founder implemented this and saw conversions increase 74% in 30 days, without changing offer or price. Trust isn't built in grand gestures. It's built in boring consistency, most won't maintain. Principle 3: Authentic Positioning The approach that helped me raise prices 300% while increasing sales: • Own your expertise unapologetically, confidence is not arrogance • Speak to specific problems you solve, not vague benefits you provide • Tell detailed stories of transformation instead of listing features You don't need to be perfect to sell effectively. You need to be authentic about how you help. Principle 4: Invitation Vs. Manipulation The ethical alternative to high-pressure tactics: • Invite people when they're ready, don't push when you're ready • Create genuine scarcity (limited capacity) not fake urgency (countdown timers) • Respect "no" as "not now" rather than objection to overcome My most profitable sales sequence has zero countdown timers, zero artificial scarcity, zero pressure. Ethical selling feels like extending help, not hunting prey. — Enjoy this? ♻️ Repost it to your network and follow Matt Gray for more. Want to improve your sales strategy? Join our community of 172,000+ subscribers today: https://lnkd.in/eTp4jain

You’re never too important to be kind to people. The misconception? Kindness is a weakness. 
The reality? Kindness is wisdom. Natasha Mahajan said it best … It’s the foundation of leadership that doesn’t just command but inspires. The kind that doesn’t demand respect but earns it effortlessly. No title, no corner office, no accolade makes unkindness acceptable. True leaders - the ones whose teams follow them not out of obligation but out of belief - lead with humanity, not just authority. Here’s how to lead with kindness that resonates deeply: 1/. Listen like they’re the only person in the room. 
Put the phone down. Look them in the eye. Ask thoughtful questions. Listening is more than hearing words - it’s valuing the person behind them. 2/. Celebrate the details. 
“Good job” is a checkmark. Highlighting what they did well and why it matters is impact. Let your praise be specific, intentional, and memorable. 3/. Protect their time and energy. 
Meetings that don’t need to happen? Cancel them. Deadlines that aren’t reasonable? Adjust them. Respecting their bandwidth shows you value their humanity over their productivity. 4/. Own your mistakes. 
Leaders don’t deflect - they take responsibility. A simple “I could’ve guided you better” builds trust faster than any excuse ever could. 5/. Remember the moments that matter. 
Birthdays. Anniversaries. Firsts and lasts. These moments may seem small, but they’re reminders that your team is made up of people, not just roles. 6/. Be tough but thoughtful. 
When hard conversations come, focus on behaviors, not character. Collaborate on solutions. Toughness doesn’t have to cut - it can build. Kindness isn’t soft.

The Worst Thing You Could Be at Work is Being "Just Yourself" People love the advice to "just be yourself at work," but I feel it's more nuanced than that. As leaders, we have multiple authentic selves. There's the version that overthinks decisions at midnight, the one that gets genuinely excited about a new idea, and the one that can guide a team through uncertainty. They're all real but they serve different moments. Leadership has taught me that authenticity isn't just showing up as you are, instead it's choosing which parts of who you are will best serve your team and mission in any given situation. The leaders I respect most (and what I try to practice) don't just "be themselves", they: 1. Read the energy in the room and adjust accordingly 2. Choose words that inspire, not just inform 3. Project steadiness even when they're working through doubt internally 4. Model the resilience they want their team to develop 5. Set standards that stretch everyone toward their potential This isn't about being performative. It's recognizing that authenticity includes the wisdom to know which version of your genuine self your people need right now. The same person who admits uncertainty in a strategy session might need to project confidence when announcing that strategy to the company. Both responses are authentic. Both have their place. How do you navigate showing up authentically while also being the leader your team needs? #LeadershipLessons #MondayMotivation

Not every connection builds you. Some quietly break you. “Build your network,” they say. What they don’t teach is the equally important skill: knowing when to create professional distance. I learned this early — and the hard way. I once shared context about office dynamics with a new colleague, thinking it would help her onboard. One of those “this stays between us” moments. It didn’t. What I meant as helpful context became circulating information. That was my first real lesson in trust. The second came later. A colleague I considered a close friend was having backchannel conversations with leadership, trying to pull one of my teams under her scope. I found out after the fact. No acknowledgment. No conversation. Just quiet maneuvering. I managed to stop it — but the damage was already done. Here’s what those experiences taught me: Anyone can be blindsided. Experience doesn’t make you immune. Ignoring your instincts just delays the cost. Being thoughtful about who you trust isn’t being guarded. It’s being responsible. Strong leaders aren’t just good at building relationships. They’re intentional about managing them. Think about it this way: You wouldn’t give everyone unrestricted access to your inbox. So why give everyone unlimited access to your time, energy, or context? Strategic distance doesn’t mean coldness. It means clarity. Here’s what that looks like in practice: ↳ Keep conversations project-focused, not personal ↳ Use the grateful redirect: “Thanks for flagging . Let’s anchor on our quarterly goals.” ↳ Create structure instead of constant availability ↳ Stay consistent and professional with everyone ↳ Share information deliberately, not reflexively The goal isn’t to burn bridges. It’s to stop building them too fast. Your time, energy, and trust are finite. Managing them well isn’t politics. It’s leadership. Not every professional relationship needs closeness to be effective. The strongest leaders know which relationships to nurture — and which to keep at a respectful distance. The hardest lessons about trust don’t come from enemies. They come from people you assumed were safe. That distinction changes how you lead. ➕ Follow Janet Kim for leadership, judgment, and career growth inside complex organizations. 📩 Level Up Weekly → janet.kim/levelup

Accountability Nearly every organization I work with at the moment is focused on some version of creating a "high-performance" culture. Alongside this goal is a push for greater speed of decision-making, efficiency, and accountability. However, a common mistake many organizations make is treating accountability as a binary attribute—individuals are either seen as accountable or not. In reality, accountability is more nuanced. Understanding accountability as a spectrum is critical for cultivating a high-performance culture. The Accountability Ladder illustrates this concept by mapping out various levels at which individuals engage with their responsibilities, ranging from unaware or indifferent to becoming proactive and inspiring others. Those familiar with the Leadership Circle Profile will note that accountability transforms as leaders pivot from an external to an internal locus of control. This move from a Reactive to Creative mindset is a critical prerequisite. Here is a summary of each step on the ladder: Unaware: At this level, individuals are not aware of the issues or their responsibilities. They lack the knowledge necessary to understand what needs to be done. Blaming Others: Individuals recognize the issue but choose to blame others rather than taking any responsibility. They see the problem as someone else's fault. Excuses: At this step, individuals acknowledge the problem but offer excuses for why they can't address or resolve it. They often cite external factors or limitations. Wait and Hope: Individuals here are aware of the problem and hope it gets resolved by itself or that someone else will take care of it. There is recognition but no action. Acknowledge Reality: This is a turning point on the ladder. Individuals acknowledge the reality of the situation and their role in it but have not yet begun to take corrective action. Own It: Individuals take ownership of the problem and accept their responsibility for dealing with it. They start to commit to resolving the issue. Find Solutions: At this step, individuals not only take ownership but also actively seek solutions. They explore various options to resolve the problem. Take Action: Individuals implement the solutions they have identified. They take concrete steps to resolve the issue. Make It Happen: Individuals not only take action but also follow through to ensure that the solutions are effective. They monitor progress and make adjustments as necessary. Inspire Others: Leaders inspire and encourage others to take accountability, creating a proactive problem-solving culture. As a team exercise, try writing the steps of the accountability ladder on a whiteboard and ask: What level of accountability do we see across the organization? What level do we exhibit as a team (to each other and our stakeholders)? And finally, where would I place myself?

Neurodiversity 101: Is there a risk in being too authentic at work? 🤔 “The privilege of a lifetime is to become who you truly are.” — Carl Jung I hear many workplaces encouraging, “bring your authentic self to work.” But what does that really mean—and I am concerned that it is it always safe to do so. Authenticity is about aligning actions with our values and personality. In inclusive workplaces, this can strengthen trust, engagement, and innovation. But authenticity isn’t always simple. We all adapt to some extent. We dress to some degree to fit in with others , try to work out and then observe the unwritten rules in new jobs, and work out how to act in different settings. That doesn’t make us inauthentic—it reflects social awareness and trying to find some commonality. Are their risks of being too authentic? While openness builds trust, it also comes with challenges: Over-sharing personal details can blur boundaries and you can't take back what has been revealed... Vulnerability can invite judgement or bias Cultural mismatch might affect perceptions or progression opportunities - I don't want to say that... but it is a reality! Brené Brown describes authenticity as a choice—to show up and be seen. "“Authenticity is the daily practice of letting go of who we think we’re supposed to be and embracing who we are. Choosing authenticity means cultivating the courage to be imperfect, to set boundaries, and to allow ourselves to be vulnerable"... but is this a privilege?Some people are still discovering who they are. Others may not feel safe to be fully open. What about masking? 🎭 Masking is more common for neurodivergent people, can be a way to fit in, avoid bias, or manage uncertainty. It’s often a protective strategy—but it can be tiring and impact well-being. How can we finding the balance ⚖️ *Know the culture: Is difference respected? *Set boundaries: Choose what you’re comfortable sharing 🔐 *Build trust slowly: Test how others respond 🤝 *Find safe spaces: Seek out understanding allies 🌱 *Use discretion: You don’t need to share everything to be real ✨ I think>.... Encouraging authenticity is important—but only works if psychological safety exists. “Bring your whole self” shouldn’t be a blanket expectation or a blanket statement. True inclusion is about choice—supporting people to be who they are, but only when they’re ready and only if it is actually safe to do so....

Another rough one — also in this month's American Economic Review. This long awaited paper — by Pascaline Dupas, Amy Handlan, Alicia Modestino, Muriel Niederle, Mateo Sere, Haoyu Sheng, Justin Wolfers, and the Seminar Dynamics Collective — explores how men and women are treated in economics seminars. Economics seminars are important for our field. They are one of the main ways we circulate our research and develop reputations among colleagues (some are also "job talks," in which audience members are deciding whether they want to hire us as colleagues). The researchers coded up thousands of seminars, both in-person and virtual, and explored gender differences in how male and female speakers were treated (controlling for various features of the seminar, including talk topic and attendance). Women were interrupted 10 to 20 percent more often then men. While interruptions could be positive (e.g., helpful suggestions) or negative (e.g., critical comments), the evidence points to women getting treated worse than men.   First, women receive nearly 50% more interruptions that are distinctively "negative in tenor (e.g., patronizing or hostile)." Second, women are much more likely to receive mid-sentence interruptions: where audience members talk over the seminar speaker (a potential sign of disrespect). These additional mid-sentence interruptions received by women come exclusively from men (see Figure 4 from the paper). There is a potential silver lining. Female seminar speakers draw more attendees on average, including more women. As the authors note, this could generate a positive "role model effect." (Unfortunately, it also exposes the next generation of researchers to our relatively poor treatment of female speakers.) These disappointing results are probably not shocking to those of us who regularly attend economics seminars. Many of us had the feeling that female economists were being treated worse. But documenting it is still incredibly important. We need to collect data on social dynamics so we can address them head on. And while academia may be a bit of an unusual industry, I suspect many of these same patterns are playing out in board rooms and online meetings across the entire labor market. #Gender #Economics #Seminars cc: Lise Vesterlund, Corinne Low, Christine Exley, Xiaoyue Shan, Eve Rodsky, American Economic Association ps: Kudos to the AER editors (Chinhui Juhn, Stefano DellaVigna, and Erzo Luttmer) for publishing two important papers on gender in the same issue.

Trust doesn't come from your accomplishments. It comes from quiet moves like these: For years I thought I needed more experience, achievements, and wins to earn trust. But real trust isn't built through credentials. It's earned in small moments, consistent choices, and subtle behaviors that others notice - even when you think they don't. Here are 15 quiet moves that instantly build trust 👇🏼 1. You close open loops, catching details others miss ↳ Send 3-bullet wrap-ups after meetings. Reliability builds. 2. You name tension before it gets worse ↳ Name what you sense: "The energy feels different today" 3. You speak softly in tense moments ↳ Lower your tone slightly when making key points. Watch others lean in. 4. You stay calm when others panic, leading with stillness ↳ Take three slow breaths before responding. Let your calm spread. 5. You make space for quiet voices ↳ Ask "What perspective haven't we heard yet?", then wait. 6. You remember and reference what others share ↳ Keep a Key Details note for each relationship in your phone. 7. You replace "but" with "and" to keep doors open ↳ Practice "I hear you, and here's what's possible" 8. You show up early with presence and intention ↳ Close laptop, turn phone face down 2 minutes before others arrive. 9. You speak up for absent team members ↳ Start with "X made an important point about this last week" 10. You turn complaints into possibility ↳ Replace "That won't work" with "Let's experiment with..." 11. You build in space for what really matters ↳ Block 10 min buffers between meetings. Others will follow. 12. You keep small promises to build trust bit by bit ↳ Keep a "promises made" note in your phone. Track follow-through. 13. You protect everyone's time, not just your own ↳ End every meeting 5 minutes early. Set the standard. 14. You ask questions before jumping to fixes ↳ Lead with "What have you tried so far?" before suggesting solutions. 15. You share credit for wins and own responsibility for misses ↳ Use "we" for successes, "I" for challenges. Watch trust grow. Your presence speaks louder than your resume. Trust is earned in these quiet moments. Which move will you practice first? Share below 👇🏼 -- ♻️ Repost to help your network build authentic trust without the struggle 🔔 Follow me Dr. Carolyn Frost for more strategies on leading with quiet impact

Peer pressure doesn’t end when you graduate. It just changes form. 👉 “Everyone’s staying late, so I must too.” 👉 “Everyone’s cutting corners, so why should I bother doing it properly?” 👉 “Everyone’s silent about this issue, so maybe I shouldn’t speak up.” The truth? Integrity is your strongest career currency. Doing what’s right may feel lonely at times, but it builds trust, credibility, and long-term growth that shortcuts never will. Here are some work tips to keep in mind: ✅ Do stand by your values. If something feels wrong, question it. Speak up respectfully. ❌ Don’t follow blindly. Just because it’s the “norm” doesn’t mean it’s the right way. ✅ Do focus on quality. Your reputation is built on how well you deliver, not how fast you follow the crowd. ❌ Don’t compromise ethics for speed. A quick win today could be a career risk tomorrow. ✅ Do choose courage over comfort. Leaders notice people who take accountability, not those who blend into the background. ❌ Don’t stay silent in the face of toxic behavior. Silence protects the wrong people. ✅ Do play the long game. Integrity compounds. People remember who was honest, fair, and reliable when pressure was high. ❌ Don’t trade trust for temporary approval. It’s not worth it. 💡 Remember: success isn’t just about what you achieve, but also how you achieve it.