RADA launches "executive presence for women" courses - what do you think?

p.s. Obvs this course must be called 'Fake It Until You Make It'.

It can probably be turned into a reality TV format for wider educational and entertainment purposes.

Also, RADA will, no doubt, be investing the profits into a bursary for low-income, state-educated, female drama students; 'The Victoria Wood Studentship'.

I think the 'anti-feminist argument' is:

1. Training women to be like men accedes to the deeply anti-feminist viewpoint that '(white, hetero, alpha) male is the norm and desirable'.

2. If there is bullying in the workplace, a toxic working environment for women, institutional sexism, unfair advancement of men, unconscious bias etc then those are the things that should be tackled.

So one can take the view that this is seeking to train women to become 'part of the establishment' - swaggering, alpha bullies - therefore part of the problem, whereas the best way to prevent people from being the victims of bullies and sexists is to take a zero tolerance approach to bullying and sexism.

My view is that all that is necessary but that I don't think that - training women to be like men - is really what this is about (so I think its sales pitch is a little misleading, in a jokey way). I think it's about training women to be their best and most effective selves in a commercial environment. Crucially, giving them the tools to 'make the sale' i.e. to take all their excellent ideas and development work and be persuasive and authoritative enough to get decisions to go their way, with them acknowledged as the progenitor of the idea, the leader of the project etc.

Personally, I think learning acting techniques would be a good approach, as there's something about taking oneself outside ones normal mode of operation that can be very freeing. So, not starting form where I am, seeking to inch forward in what I already do by learning new techniques. Rather, starting from somewhere outside myself and my experience, with techniques that I wouldn't have known about.

I also think it's a money-making exercise for RADA (but why not, arts funding doesn't fall from the sky) and, that many 'beta men' would benefit from it too - but starting with women makes a lot of sense.

If the aim of the course is to undo the socialisation of women that leaves them at a disadvantage in the workplace, then it is a good thing.

If it makes explicit cultural norms so that women can better read a culture they are less familiar with, then that is good too.

It's counter productive to complain about the socialisation of women, and complain about attempts to redress it.

I'm struggling with that view too.

There's so much that many women do unconsciously that undermines their own authority. I am an assertive and fairly feisty woman. However, I know that when I started out in an industry dominated by men, I constantly "apologised for my presence" both verbally and non-verbally, and I was totally unaware that I was doing this.

"Assertiveness Training" used to be a very important tool in the empowerment of women. And, even just reading Mumsnet shows that it still needed, both in women's public and private lives.

I am struggling here a bit with the view that it is somehow anti feminist to promote the idea. Or am I misunderstanding?

I'm not sure it will do much good. 20 years ago when I entered the workforce, I acted "like a man." I took up space, I felt I had s right to be there, i interrupted. I did this naturally because I was confident, capable and passionate. I got thumped for it. Women don't act this way because they are not allowed to act this way.

Firstly, I think RADA have identified a gap gimmick in the market and that this course is a business opportunity rather than an altruistic attempt to improve women's lot.

Even the fact the they are offering the course has an implicit message. You doing it all wrong love, come and learn to be more like a man

No thanks

I would love to do a course like this (although probably wouldn't pay for it myself). I wonder what sort of level it is pitched at? As long as it's not too basic, I think it could be really useful - I would hope for that kind of money the course isn't just a 'state the obvious' stand up / sit up / speak up / don't apologise course. I'm a senior lawyer in the City and while I try hard not to fall into the kinds of behaviours mentioned in the articles, I do find I have to make a conscious effort and a course of this kind could be really helpful.

They've obviously not spent enough time on mumsnet. Head tilting is the ultimate bit of passive aggressive body language!

Diodati, this course is not sexist because it is addressing a recognized issue that affects women in the workplace.

It would also not be sexist to run a course called "Using Active Listening - a guide for men in the workplace" grin]

I can really see the benefit of this - and would have got something out of it, when seeking to personify 'authoritative' myself.

I also agree that tackling unprofessional, discriminatory and narrow-minded behaviours in men should be a priority.

I think though that those are two sides of the same coin and that coin is 'effective professionalism'.

I see this as being about helping women achieve that for themselves - not training them to be psuedo-men or into the bad habits some men have (am reading the PR puff as such, attention-grabbing and a bit tongue-in-cheek).

Domineering men, who do things in the way they've always been done and hire people who resemble themselves, do their industries no favours. In invisible ways and the longer-term, they are ineffective. So they need training in inclusivity, unconscious bias, active listening, creative thinking etc.

A with everything, the value of this for the company and, the desirability of continuing to work in that company for the women so trained, will depend on the true intent of the managers paying for the course. Is this their token effort to be seen to support inclusivity? Or, is it one part of a concerted, top-down approach to making their business really inclusive and effective? Do the people with power really give a damn?

I think this is a good thing, but I also agree that "telling women to be more like men" is insufficient.

Men DO need to apologise more when they make a mistake, and do need to say "this is just my opinion" when something is just their opinion.

Women ALSO should apologise less, and stand up for their knowledge when they know best.

Women act like this because we have been put down all our lives and told to be nice and quiet and polite and told that their opinions don't matter and their experience doesn't count.

If the world were to stop treating girls and women in this way, in a generation women would not have to be told to stop over-apologising or saying "just" all the time, because they wouldn't have been pushed down all their lives.

I think I am disappointed that Deborah Frances-White is not running them.

BertrandRussell
sex·ist
ˈseksist/
adjective
1. 1. 
relating to or characterized by prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex."his attitude to women is patronizing and sexist"






*PPs above - damn you autocorrect

I think it's great that RADA are doing this and making a splash about it, which might make women sit up and think about this aspect of how they present themselves, even if they don't go on the course. Paps above who comment on the need for the rest of the world to change have a point - but while we are waiting for that to happen, women can and should think about how they present themselves and ensure it is effective and fit for purpose if they want to get on.

I write as someone who had a very senior and successful business career, and definitely benefited along the way from learning some of the skills discussed in the Times article which this course will cover. We often used communication professionals - including actors - to help us to improve our presentation skills. By this I don't just mean standing up and talking, but everything about how you demonstrate your seniority, leadership, command etc in a business environment. I saw so many incredibly capable women letting themselves down by operating as though they were much younger and less senior than they were - its not about behaving like a man, its about showing you take yourself seriously so that others will also take you seriously. Some women naturally have gravitas - but women have often been socialised as they grow up to behave in an apologetic, demurring, self-effacing way and this does affect how they are perceived. I never had to be aggressive, but being calm, confident, and taking my space at the table and fully occupying it both literally and metaphorically meant that men didn't tend to turn to me as the only woman in the Boardroom and ask me to pour the coffee.

For those commenting on the cost, the course price is very typical for a one-day business course, which is who this is aimed at. Most attendees will have their fees paid by their employers as part of their ongoing professional development. I don't think they would expect individuals to self pay. As a manager, I have certainly paid more than this for a talented woman on my team to have coaching in executive presence - and it made a real difference to her career development.

I should point out that all my staff are female, probably.

Now (and please don't shoot me down for mansplaining!) I do actually encourage my female staff to follow some of these rules - generally, if you listen to the telephone calls (mostly accounts work) it is surprising how much apologising goes on. These are business to business calls, so there really is no need - shit happens.

By 'banning' the word sorry from our vocab, it did help the general approach to the work, and, I think, my colleagues felt a bit less ground down by stuff.

(as it happens, we are often trying to delay paying suppliers - the big ones anyway. We always pay the window cleaner promptly etc).

I am by no means 'Alpha' male, or even Beta etc - but I don't tend to apologise for stuff I personally haven't done wrong.

If it addresses an issue that disproportionately affects one sex it is not sexist.

Apart from such a course being sexist, presumably a woman who can afford such an outrageous sum wouldn't "need" to be taught professional assertiveness.

I don't particularly like the idea of a course specially for women but I do think Executive Presence courses can be quite enlightening for both men and women.

As background, I'm a woman working in the City in a senior role. I'm the only female member of my company's management team (I'm also the second youngest member). The investment banking industry is still very male dominated but having worked in the industry for so long surrounded by men, it's quite normal for me. The thought of a female dominated office makes me nervous as I imagine it could be quite bitchy. Male friends (of which I have many due to working with so many men!) tell me that I "think like a man" (in their eyes this apparently means that I'm logical rather than emotional!). Certainly I pretty much already do most of the things RADA are suggesting women should do. I think I've probably developed these traits as I've become more senior. It hasn't been a conscious development but somehow I went from being frustrated that men never listen to me in meetings (but 5 mins later a man can say what I'd already suggested and everyone leaps on it as a great idea and the man gets all the credit) to being one of the people who dominates the room (even if I'm not speaking). I don't know how it happened, it just did! However, the one thing I am very conscious of in meetings is body language. Sitting like a meek person with your head down or nodding with your hands in your lap is not good! I mentor a number of junior staff (male and female) and this is something I often pick them up on (in a nice way, we try to have a laugh about it).

My former employer sent me on a 3 day residential course for "Executive Presence" (at my request as I wanted to further develop my presentation skills). It was for both sexes though! (my class was probably one third women, two thirds men). It was actually one of the hardest courses that I've ever been on but I learnt a lot and met some great (and very bright) people. Maybe this is why I actually think RADA's course would be quite interesting although I would prefer it to be open to all sexes. There are plenty of men out there who also need the help. However, I will admit that it does tend to be women who have often been raised to be more subservient and empathetic, and this isn't always effective in the workplace, especially a male dominated one. I don't think it's about women behaving like men. I see it more as learning a new language or dialect in order to communicate more effectively with people you work with. I change my communication style depending on who I'm meeting with and to me this is just a form of that.

I saw it in the paper and was shocked that they are charging so much. Ridiculous.

Hello, no I wouldn't take the RADA course, even if it was free.

It's a kick in the teeth to women working in a sexist industry (and make no mistake, the film & TV industry is massively sexist, and has been shown to be so over and over again, with fewer roles for women, and fewer opportunities for women directors, writers, and producers)

There are plenty of men in positions of power in these industries, and they are the ones who have the power to change how sexist it is - by making it easier for women to get to the top. Men like Lorne Michaels have done this in the US for women like Amy Poehler and Tina Fey. (and by association, Kirstin Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, and Leslie Jones.)

Instead, RADA have said up an expensive course in which women can pay to find out why the sexism in the industry is all their own fault.

2/10

Women are trained from an early age to be accommodating and self effacing. Being more assertive in the workplace (and in life!) is a very valuable lesson for many.

What a load of crap!

Men are men and women are women. The world would probably be a better place if each one stopped trying to be more like the other.