Identifying Emotional Biases

That VC asked who was picking up my kids. So I started tracking every bias. 165 investor meetings. 73 inappropriate questions. I documented them all. The data will make you angry. Good. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗶𝗮𝘀 𝗯𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗱𝗼𝘄𝗻: • 31 asked about childcare arrangements • 19 questioned my "work-life balance" • 14 asked if my husband was "okay with this" • 9 wondered how I'd handle travel with kids 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗸𝗶𝗰𝗸𝗲𝗿: VCs who asked about my kids? 0% conversion. VCs who asked about unit economics? 23% conversion. Meeting #47: "How does your husband feel about you running the company?" Meeting #48: Pitched to his rival. Got a cheque. 𝗜 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝘁 𝗮 𝗯𝗶𝗮𝘀 𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗱: -10 points for each personal question -20 points for childcare concerns -30 points for "husband" questions -50 points for suggesting I hire a male CEO The worst offender? -140 points. Still took the meeting. Still said no to their offer. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲'𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗻𝗲𝗱: Bias is predictable. Track it. Your time has value. Protect it. Their questions reveal their thinking. You don't need their approval. The pattern is clear: Investors who focused on my personal life weren't serious about my business. 𝗦𝗼 𝗜 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗱 𝗺𝘆 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵: Created pre-meeting filters Asked my own screening questions Walked out of 3 meetings (yes, really) Turned down two term sheets (painful but necessary) Only engaged high-conviction investors Your kids aren't a liability. They're watching you build empires. What's the worst bias you've faced in a pitch? #BiasInVC  #FemaleFounders  #FundraisingData

✨ One wish I have for 2025? For women to stop hearing they need to “get more confident” to be considered for leadership positions. If you’re a manager, here’s a thought: one of the most powerful ways to support aspiring leaders isn’t by pointing out their supposed lack of confidence—it’s by providing developmental feedback that’s specific, actionable and geared towards growth. And this challenge is on you. Why? Because gender bias gets in the way of that. Research* shows that women receive less useful, less actionable feedback than men—and they’re far more likely to be told they need to “work on their confidence.” But here’s the truth: it’s not about confidence. It’s about clarity. It’s about giving women the kind of feedback that helps them focus on the right skill development, not vague notions of personality. So, how can you get this right in practice? I’ve shared a comic slip below that breaks this down and I highly recommend the full article* for more tips and examples. I hope we can create workplaces where leadership readiness is measured not by “confidence” or outdated assumptions about what leaders should look like but by competence. Do you also think “confidence” is overrated as a measure of leadership potential? Looking for more DEI content based on my comics? Download free "A short guide on inclusive leadership" here: https://lnkd.in/dDXhHe6H 🎁 *Sources: HBR “Men Get More Actionable Feedback Than Women” by Elena Doldor, Madeleine Wyatt, and Jo Silvester “No Hard Feelings” by Liz Fosslien and Mollie West Duffy

I recently led a workshop with senior leaders on unconscious bias, one of the most subtle yet impactful forces shaping workplaces today. Here are some key, thought-provoking takeaways: Talent Pipeline: - Bias in "fit" over potential– We often seek candidates who feel like a "good fit," but this focus on familiarity limits diversity of thought and experience. By sticking with what feels comfortable, we may be missing out on the very perspectives that can push our business forward. - Meritocracy myths– Many of us believe we’re creating a merit-based environment, but unconscious bias can lead us to underestimate talent that doesn't mirror our own journey or leadership style. Thought: Could the future leaders of your organization be getting overlooked because they don't fit the traditional mold? What opportunities are we missing by favoring comfort over potential? Performance management - Critical vs. nurturing feedback– Studies show men often receive feedback that highlights their potential, while women and minorities are judged more on their current performance. This can lead to a self-fulfilling cycle where some are groomed for leadership, while others are held back. - Bias in “leadership traits”– We tend to associate leadership with traditionally masculine traits like decisiveness and assertiveness, while underappreciating qualities like empathy and collaboration. This limits the development of diverse leadership styles and stifles more inclusive forms of leadership. Thought: Are we unconsciously reinforcing outdated ideas of leadership that prevent diverse talent from rising? What if the traits we’re overlooking are exactly what the future of leadership needs? Bias as a leadership challenge Unconscious bias isn’t just an HR issue—it’s a leadership challenge that permeates every level of decision-making: - Awareness isn’t enough– Simply recognising our biases isn’t sufficient. We need strategies that actively challenge our instincts and foster fairer, more inclusive decision-making. - Courageous conversations– Creating an environment where it’s safe to talk about bias isn’t easy, but it’s essential. These discussions help us redefine how we view leadership, success, and talent. Addressing unconscious bias isn't a one-time fix—it's an ongoing commitment to redefining how we lead and make decisions. By fostering a culture that actively challenges bias, we don't just create a more inclusive workplace—we build a stronger, more innovative organization. The real challenge is: Are we willing to do the hard work to make it happen? #leadership #highperformance #DEI #inclusion

Toby's Idioms Advent Calendar 🎄 - Day 1️⃣ : "You don't control the perception of your intent; you can only guide it" Have you ever got some feedback that genuinely surprised you (in a bad way), or maybe an initiative that you've poured a lot of personal energy into, that lands poorly with your colleagues? I hear so commonly from individuals that they're confused why it didn't work, or that that someone thought something negative about them - particularly when it’s an attribute they thought was a strength. A lot of it often boils down to the fact that your intentions were only known to you. All of that internal soul searching, and the moral arguments you make with yourself, are still stuck in your head. Without that context, all other people see is limited to their own interpretation of your actions. Interpretations that are subject to their personal bias and opinions. Perception truly is in the eye of the beholder. Never assume that everyone else just "gets" your intention. The key (to so many things) is communication. Being up-front WHY you think this is the right thing. Be open and transparent about your actions, they can't see what's in your mind. Explain it to them. The more you do this, the more you'll build trust, the more they'll be able to predict and second guess thinking. Eventually you won't even need to communicate it, they'll just know - but that doesn't mean you shouldn't! It's not infallible. There will always be one or two that still don't believe you, or naturally see ulterior motive or conspiracy. All you can do is close the delta between intent and perception, and accept you'll just have to work a little harder with just the one or two that are left. #Leadership #CareerAdvice #CareerGuidance #Mentoring

Your competence at work is judged in seconds. Even when you over-deliver, you can be underestimated. Every day, false assumptions about you are made: — Polite = Weak — Older = Not agile — A foreign accent = Less capable — Introverted =  Not a strong leader — Woman =  Softer voice, less authority It's not just unfair. It's exhausting. So the question is: How do you beat biases without changing who you are? Here’s what I recommend: 𝟭. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 → Speak about impact, not effort. → Articulate your value proposition. →“Here’s the problems I solve. Here's how. Here’s the result."  If no one knows what you bring to the table, they won’t invite you to it. 𝟮. 𝗩𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿 Silent excellence is wasted potential. → Speak up when it feels risky. → Build real not just strategic relationships. → Share insights where people are paying attention. You don’t need to be loud. You need to be seen. 𝟯. 𝗧𝘂𝗿𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 The traits that trigger assumptions? Those are your edge. → Introverted? That’s deep listening. → Accent? That’s global perspective. Don’t flatten yourself to fit. Distinguish yourself to lead. 𝟰. 𝗢𝘄𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 → Say “I recommend” not "I think.” → Hold eye contact. Take up space. → Act like your presence belongs (even when others haven’t caught up.) Confidence isn’t volume. It’s grounding. Bias is everywhere. But perception can be changed. Don't let other people's false assumptions define you. Do you agree? ➕ Follow Deena Priest for strategic career insights. 📌Join my newsletter to build a career grounded in progress, peace and pay.

High EQ isn’t just empathy. It’s the discipline to question your certainty - before it becomes your liability: The danger isn’t what you know. It’s what you think you know that just isn’t so. That’s where leadership can still trip up: not in ignorance, but in assumption. Cognitive biases quietly hijack decision-making: 🟤 Confirmation Bias: - You only seek data that agrees with you. - Missed red flags follow. 🟤 Overconfidence Effect: - Gut feel becomes gospel. - The next call goes unchecked. 🟤 Anchoring Bias: - The first idea becomes the finish line. - Even when better exists. 🟤 Status Quo Bias: - Comfort feels right. - Progress quietly dies. Respected leaders don’t guess. They design better decisions: → Red Teaming: Assign someone to challenge your thinking - hard. → Pre-Mortem: Ask, “If this fails in 6 months, why?” Then fix it now. → Second-Order Thinking: Chase ripple effects beyond the obvious. → OODA Loop: Observe. Orient. Decide. Act. Then repeat. These tools don’t slow you down. They protect you from illusion. Most people defend what feels right. High EQ Leaders inspect what’s actually true. Before the next important move - ask yourself: What am I assuming here…and how do I know it’s still valid? Let's see your thoughts on this in comments below. ♻️ Repost to help others lead and work better together. 🔔 Follow me Ronnie Kinsey, MBA for more like this. 📥 Get more of my tools for leadership, business, and personal development here Free: ➤ https://lnkd.in/dkagD_Wp <+>

In response to receiving accusations of ableism for saying there’s a hidden bias in calling certain foods “smelly,” this is why sensory sensitivity doesn’t excuse exclusion👃: In a recent post, I pointed out how office etiquette discouraging “smelly” lunches can reinforce exclusion, since what we consider “pungent” or “unpleasant” is subjective and shaped by cultural biases. This led to some accusations that I was minimising sensory sensitivities and denying that some foods have particular smells. But my point wasn’t to dismiss sensory challenges but to show that perceptions of smell aren’t as neutral as we think. Amelia Louks’ research on the politics of smell in modern and contemporary prose, which recently went viral, helps unpack this point. While her thesis isn’t yet published, a summary article on The Conversation offers valuable insights. For example, In The Road to Wigan Pier (1936), George Orwell observes how the idea that “the lower classes smell” was used to uphold harmful class divisions.  Similarly, in Toni Morrison’s Tar Baby (1981), a character racialised the idea of smell, telling a Black woman, “I know you’re an animal because I smell you.” These examples reveal how judgements about smell are often tied to who the person is, rather than the odour itself. Foods more closely tied to non-Western cultures, like curries, fish dishes, or stews,  are often labelled as “too smelly,” while equally strong-smelling foods like bacon rarely face the same judgment. This reveals a clear cultural bias. Sensory sensitivities are real, and strong smells can cause genuine pain and distress. But when people say some foods “just smell,” they are often oversimplifying a complex, conditioned reaction. Recognising this doesn’t dismiss sensory challenges, but simply means understanding that judgements about smell are often tied to who is eating the food, not just the odour. We should therefore be mindful of making exclusionary remarks like “That smells weird” or “What is that?” and avoid centring our own discomfort to the point where others feel unwelcome or ashamed of their identity. In shared spaces like the workplace, we also should balance supporting sensory needs with avoiding practices that disproportionately exclude certain groups. #inclusion #workplaceinclusion #inclusionmatters #antiracism #wellbeing #workplacewellbeinh

𝗘𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘃𝘀. 𝗖𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗿 𝗝𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘆 : 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗪𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝘁 I recently had a humorous debate with a startup founder in the medical retail space about the traditional 𝗖𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗿 𝗝𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘆 𝗠𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 of the step-by-step path from “𝘞𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶?” to “𝘚𝘩𝘶𝘵 𝘶𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘮𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺!” - and how it’s slowly fading. Pointed out that decisions are rarely driven by logic alone - 𝗲𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗲𝗹. That’s where 𝗘𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 steps in, adding depth to the modern customer journey by capturing what customers 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗹 at every step, not just what they 𝘥𝘰. 𝗦𝗼, 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁’𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲? 𝗖𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗿 𝗝𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘆: Tracks actions - Click, Buy, Install, Complain, Repeat. Basically, it’s the 𝗚𝗼𝗼𝗴𝗹𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝗽𝘀 of user behavior. 𝗘𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴: Tracks 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 - Excitement, Confusion, Frustration, Relief, Joy. Think of it as the 𝗦𝗽𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗳𝘆 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝘆𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁 playing in their heads throughout the journey. 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗗𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗘𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿? Because no one remembers what they clicked. But they 𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗺𝗮𝗱𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗹, Clicks fade from memory, but emotions stick - kind of like the joy of finding extra onions in your biryani order! Refer Swiggy or Zomato. 𝗖𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗿 𝗝𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘆: 1. Search for food. 2. Select restaurant. 3. Place order. 4. Track delivery. 5. Eat happily. 𝗘𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗠𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴: 1. Hunger Craving – Excited! 2. Menu Browsing – Confused. Too many options! 3. Checkout Price – Shocked. Swiggy, why you do this? 4. Order Tracking – Anxiety. Why is the delivery guy circling ? 5. Food Arrives – Relief and Joy! 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗕𝗼𝘁𝗵? 𝗠𝗮𝗽 𝗘𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: Attach emotional states to each step of the customer journey. 𝗔𝗱𝗱𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗣𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗣𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁: Like adding “Cash on Delivery” for Indian parents who still don’t trust online payments. 𝗔𝗱𝗱 𝗘𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗧𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗴𝗲𝗿𝘀: Surprise discounts or funny delivery updates - because who doesn’t love a “𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘪𝘳𝘺𝘢𝘯𝘪 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘩𝘰𝘮𝘦!” text? Customer Journeys tell you 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 customers do. Emotional Mapping tells you 𝘄𝗵𝘆 they do it - and why they sometimes rage - quit in the middle. Combine both, and you’ll build products that customers don’t just use - they 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗹 for. #productgyan #customersatisfaction #uiux #customerjourney #emotionalmapping #customerservice #productengineering

I remember giving a welcome speech to a group of over 200 people in a hotel on the island Kos in Greece. It was my second season as a representative of a tour operator. My goal was to encourage the crowd to buy as many excursions and rent vehicles as they could. It was a huge sales pitch. I was incredibly successful. 20 years later, I‘m also presenting in front of 200 people. This time it’s not that easy to get a buy-in from every participant and reach the goal I intended. Ok, let’s be clear, nobody is for everyone. Neither am I, I know that. But talking about complex topics like how people are being excluded in the workplace and what we can do about it is a whole other thing. These topics are not easy to follow nor easy to accept. Why is behavioral change around DEI so difficult? Most Bias, Diversity, Equity & Inclusion trainings are designed to educate the employees and give them the information they are perceived to lack. This approach can be received as paternalistic, and implies that behavioral changes can only be created teaching knowledge. Participants might feel that there is something “wrong” with them. And, guess what? Of course that makes them feel defensive, and less motivated to change their behavior. The thing is, that people’s behavior is not only determined by their knowledge but also by other factors like their values, motivations, and anxieties. Therefore we need training approaches that go beyond just teaching people what to do. Trainings should respect the participants’ autonomy and give them tools to direct their own actions towards shared goals. That’s why I’ve been focusing on Empowerment in all of my formats where the participants are enabled to lead the change. It's also important to assume the participants are well intended (that's very hard for me since I'm biased myself). And let’s not forget that trainings around social justice can only be effective if the systemic issues that allowed bias in the first place are addressed in the organization. One training alone will not change anything. And, if being poorly conducted, it can actually harm the DEI efforts. A study from 2016 found that DEI trainings are effective if they focus on skill development and are conducted over a long period of time. What do we learn from this now? Yes, we need DEI trainings. Yes, you need more than a 1-hour training. Yes, the people you hire for this work should know about scientific-based and cognitive-behavioral approaches. Yes, systematic transformations in the organization are critical for a sustainable and successful cultural change. Do you believe in DEI trainings? How can DEI trainings be effective? #WorkshopFacilitation #Trainings #Diversity #Equity #Inclusion ALT Text in the picture and the comments.

We all want to reward employees fairly, yet decades of research--and for many people, their lived experience--show that bias persists. In other words, for the same performance, people earn less or more due to managerial error. New research from researchers at our Stanford VMware Women's Leadership Innovation Lab shows that many interventions are only targeting half the problem. Bias shows up both in how managers describe (view) performance as well as how they reward (value) behaviors. Viewing biases often show up in how performance is described differently based on who is performing it. Men’s approach may be called “too soft,” thus “subtly faulting them for falling short of assertive masculine ideals.” Valuing biases can show up as the same behavior being rewarded when men perform it but not when women do. Examples from the research show that men benefitted when their project specifics were described, whereas women were not. So the same description and behaviors showed up in reviews, but they were only rewarded on men’s. What can be done to curb biases? ✅ Standardize specific guidelines for how managers should view employee behaviors and assign corresponding rewards when giving employees feedback and making decisions about their careers. ✅ Help managers catch bias in both viewing and valuing. ✅ Monitor these impacts from entry level to executive leadership. It turns out that as the criteria shift, so can the way these biases work. A key lesson from our research shows that the work takes discipline, consistency and accountability. These steps may seem like a lot of “extra” work, but at the end of the day, managers also benefit when they weed out biases and fairly promote the most talented employees. Article by Alison Wynn, Emily Carian, Sofia Kennedy and JoAnne Wehner, PhD published in Harvard Business Review. #diversityequityinclusion #performanceevaluation #managerialskills