Elizabeth Mapstone

psychologist and story-writer

Arguments At Work

Contents

Argument at work creates as much distress, confusion and anger in peoples' lives as does argument among intimates, and can be just as important, just as stressful and just as baffling.

Argument at work is also necessary. Discussion, debate, dispute, negotiation are all essential elements of working together, and those who do not understand what is going on are at a disadvantage. If you do understand "the rules of the game", you need never be their helpless victim and might even, at times, turn them to your own account.

"Assertiveness is treated as an interpersonal skill which women lack, the acquisition of which will help them to compete on equal terms with men...The focus rules out questions about the way men relate to women's authority, and the long-term necessity for all women to work with defensive male colleagues." (Wendy Hollway, psychologist)
"My observation is that there is really a different language. If women are sports fans and speak that language, then they can earn men's respect. This has nothing to do with their skills in business, but it is extraneous stuff that makes a difference." (Carrie, a university administrator)

Games Businessmen Play

Games language may be a way of gaining respect, but there is more. Men tend to be playing games while they are at work, and these may not always be sports: they may be war games too.

The difficulty most women have is that they tend not to think in terms of games at all, and if they do, they think a game is a recreation, it is for fun, and so is not important. Wrong, says linguist Suzette Haden Elgin. She argues that women are disadvantaged in the business world because they do not understand the rules by which men operate and which they learned as boys in their all male culture: all negotiations are games, and games are important. So not only is it crucial to discover what game the other person is thinking of (golf? cricket? football?), you had better take that particular game seriously because you can be sure he does.

As we are all aware, women do not compete in games on equal terms with men: in no area of sport are they considered equal, whether their acknowledged physical differences are relevant or not. This may well be yet another reason why women are discounted in business negotiations. They can win in such negotiations, but a woman's negotiation skills may frequently be rendered ineffective unless she recognizes which game is being played, and whether the men involved are also playing the Gender Game.

Women Who Feel They Are Winning

Jenifer, now 26 years old, joined a small computing company soon after her 18th birthday. She had no qualifications, had simply walked out of university (to her mother's consternation) the day she legally came of age, joined a friend in London and found a job. Jenifer had no need for training in that assertiveness we are told women lack: she told the man who interviewed her she would learn whatever skills they needed, in her own time, and he took her on as a clerk. Within two months, she had her own desk, her own filing cabinet, her own computer on which she was fast becoming a skilled word processor. They loved her, and she loved them. She arrived at 8 in the morning, rarely left for home until 6 or 7 at night. As the company grew - for computing companies were a growth industry even while the economy elsewhere sagged (this was the late 80s) - Jenifer took on more responsibility, learned more skills. She acquired an assistant. Now she has two. (Both were 18 when taken on, and are learning on the job.) Now Jenifer has a new title, Office Administrator, a part share in a house and runs a tiny car. Her boss tells her she is an excellent administrator, and promises her further advancement when the company grows.

Jenifer feels successful, and her confident, friendly manner shows this. She is tall, willowy, dresses in a casual smart style, and her smile could soften the hardest heart. But what about argument? She laughed, but would talk only in general terms.

"Oh, yes, I argue with the men in the office all the time. But it's all very friendly, and I usually get what I want. I'm very reasonable and they know it. Of course, some of them try it on, but I tell them, it's time we had more sexual harassment round here, not less. You'd be surprised how quickly they back off then. It's only a game, so I play my part too, and we get on fine."

Jenifer sees sexual innuendo in the office as a game, just as many men do. She is perfectly happy that her undoubted physical attractions do not go unnoticed, and perfectly confident that she can deal with any unwanted attentions.

Like Jenifer, Suzy and Maureen feel that the bad old days are gone and men and women can be friends in the office.

"I don't think it's a problem for us. We don't attack men, you see, and they know we want to cooperate. We can be friends these days. It's different from the way it was for you." (Suzy, 24, information officer)
"We don't want to fight men. We want to get on with them, and they know we want to be friends. Everyone knows fighting is destructive, and you have to work together. We just don't have a problem with that." (Maureen, editorial assistant)

Anita, a 24-year-old PA, agrees:

"The thing is to turn it round and say to them the same things they say to you. They just laugh then. It means nothing. Except of course they know I'm not available, so we can get on with the job in a friendly way. There was one man who got aggressive, and he actually chased me round his desk before I could get to the door. I told him straight, Don't you ever do that again or I am going straight to the boss. That was it. He's careful now."

Why is it, I asked, that whenever I talk about argument with male colleagues, young women usually bring up the issue of sexual harassment? Anita laughed:

"It's only natural, isn't it? You can't help your hormones."

The Gender Game is complicated and difficult to deal with just because relations between women and men almost always raise issues of sex. This is especially the case when we are talking of work, where women and men have to meet and work together on a regular, even daily basis, and even more especially when young women are concerned. It matters to a man whether the woman with whom he is supposedly discussing a business issue is young, shapely and sexually attractive or middle-aged or old.

This does not, of course, mean that every man looks on every woman as a sexual object: but she is seen as primarily a female in relation to him as a male, and so her age and physical attractiveness determine the kind of relationship he can develop with her. Youth and beauty mean sexual attraction to most men, and as we have seen, these young and beautiful women are quite happy to be seen as sexually attractive. What they do not want is that sexual attraction to be translated into action that will cost them their jobs.

Fitting the Image

Deirdre's Story

Deirdre, a mechanical engineer, has a different story:

"Having spent all those years in British Rail, with men trying to use my gender as a weapon against me, I now think all those sexual attentions were another way of trying to get control. Perhaps it might have been better to fight more, except we none of us really knew how. You don't get taught to fight back as a girl, even if you are going into a man's world. [...] I never had any trouble with the men I had working for me, they were always very nice and helpful, no problems. It was those who were my equals, and just hated to have to deal with a woman. Conflicts were mostly with contractors, where we had to agree, and he would need to win. I got tired and frustrated, and had no sense I could control anything. It was a constant battle."

One important difference is the kind of work the women quoted here are involved in. Deirdre tried to move into a predominantly male world, that of applied mechanical engineering. Jenifer is an administrator, Anita a personal assistant, Suzy an information officer and Maureen is an editorial assistant: all of these are predominantly female occupations - or in the case of administrators, a growing female occupation.

But is it simply a question of numbers in a particular field, or is there something more? What about the difference in attitude? Perhaps Deirdre was too diffident, perhaps turning the tables as Jenifer and Anita claim to do is the real solution?

I suggest that the real issue is one of interpretation, and that interpretations are again governed by the Division of Labour .

Winning in the Division of Labour

One reason why Jenifer and the others can feel so successful (and perhaps a little smug) is that they are earning a living while doing a job that fits the Division of Labour. It is a woman's task to look after relationships within the social group to which she belongs, make sure everyone within that social group is contented and well cared for. Social groupings develop and change, and the increase in women's employment is a reflection of these changes. Women find that more and more they are acceptable and even desirable in an increasing number of jobs where their "womanly skills" are useful. Office administration is one: what does an administrator of a small office do but ensure that everyone has the space and equipment they need to do their job, look after junior staff, and generally minister to the needs of all senior executives?

Employers like young assertive women, willing to take responsibility without the perks, company car and higher pay that men demand: they are good to look at, eager to please and work hard.

So young women tend to believe they have cracked it. They are winning.

And this may be so. Things may have changed for this new generation of women making their mark in so many different areas. But the diaries their colleagues kept of arguments with women at the office tell a different story. So do the interviews I conducted with men and women up and down the country.

The Male Boss

Hierarchy and power

Hierarchies dominate the workplace. Men tend to appreciate this crucial fact of life better than women. It makes good sense to them, whereas many women find hierarchies alienating. When women set up in business for themselves, they have often tried to establish cooperatives, in which each participant is theoretically equal.

This difference in attitude is fed from two different sources: first, a man can, in principle, see himself climbing the ladder to the top, whereas a woman has traditionally found herself at the very bottom, expected to provide the services which will help the man climb over her to the heights; second, the male culture in which boys learn what is expected of them emphasises power and status, whereas female culture still emphasises relationship and cooperation.

Some women tend to find men's emphasis on status absurd and even comical at times: it as though they are observing the customs of a strange tribe. Ann, in her very first office job after raising three children, confessed:

"I have real problems keeping the contempt off my face when I listen to them. They are like little boys. I got into trouble because I didn't give one of the men his cup of coffee. He knows where the kettle is. What's the problem?"

Ann is at the bottom of the hierarchy, that's the problem - her problem. She laughed and agreed, she had learnt that, though she did feel that "men are such children, playing games all the time". A dangerous attitude for women to take in a man's world, because they have established the unwritten rules.

Men have developed a series of strategies which enable them to deal with problems of personal dislike or enmity: they avoid seeing the other person as an individual, but deal with him according to his position in the hierarchy. Most men can call on their experience of team sports, or even gang hierarchies, to understand that they have a specific task to perform within a structure that everyone else understands. Just as every soldier learns on joining the army "to salute the rank, not the person", so most men in full-time employment are able to accept that the workplace has a social structure into which they must fit if they are to survive, and the first thing they do is learn the rules.

This is the secret behind most men's willing acceptance of hierarchies: by making a distinction between the person and the office he holds, a man can obey the office-holder without feeling in any way inferior to him as a person. Furthermore, he can see clearly where he stands in relation to all others in the workplace, and knows that all subordinates in turn must take orders from him.

The Male Boss

Giving orders to a Woman

Most women in work are low on the hierarchy, and expected to obey orders without question. However, female culture emphasises cooperation and equality. While a woman is unlikely to want "to cause trouble", she may wish to question her instructions, and she doesn't like being ordered about anyway, she prefers to be asked.

But from the point of view of the male boss, what happens when a woman queries an order? What happens when he expects prompt obedience because of his position in the hierarchy and she disagrees openly with him?

Anger, that's what happens. Men report that arguments with female subordinates can fill them with rage.

Mike, 36, is marketing manager for a manufacturer of small consumer electrical goods in the Home Counties, and finds himself engaged in endless battles with other managers on the same level, as well as with his boss and with subordinates. One woman on his staff wanted to change priorities in a series of tasks. When she tried to explain and defend her choice, Mike exploded. His explanation was:

"I am the manager. I say what should be done when."

Martin, manager of a large retail store, was infuriated by Angie, his senior assistant, who tried to persuade him to change his decision not to send her on a training course.

"It is my job to determine how to deploy staff, and she is needed in the shop. Her attitude was unacceptable."

This particular decision led to a series of confrontations, as Angie obviously felt Martin's decision was unfair, particularly when she learned he was sending a more junior member of staff instead. In the end, her boyfriend came to argue with Martin on her behalf. Martin was furious, and had him thrown out.

"My decision was justified, and it was not his place to intervene."

Indeed not. But we can see that Angie felt unfairly treated, and the more she tried to express this view, the deeper she dug herself in the mire. Martin and Mike did not want to hear. Nor did Frank bother to listen to his secretary when she argued that his decision to change her working conditions was unfair. In fact, he was not sure whether she actually heard what he said or not:

"She was annoyed! But what I say goes, so she has no choice in the matter."

The Male Boss

Dealing with male subordinates

When a man has to deal with a male subordinate who argues for a different view, his account is rather different. He may get angry - though the levels reported are not as high as when the dispute is with a woman - but he also shows a greater need to explain the situation. He still emphasises that ultimately the power of choice lies with him, but coercion is less overt than with a woman. He tries to convince a male subordinate of the rationality of his decision.

"He wanted to reduce our prices. There is frequent pressure from sales to reduce prices based on insufficient facts. I have to resist this pressure until I am convinced there is a case. He saw that I was right, and he had not got the facts to defend his case." (Mike)

Gordon, a consultant in software engineering, on a series of arguments with a member of his staff who was not producing adequate programming for an important contract:

"He does tend to get a bit ratty at times, if I ask him to rethink his work. He finds it difficult to accept that his programme isn't working properly, even when it is perfectly clear that it is not. This does annoy me, but I try not to let it get to me too much. The important thing is to get the job done."

Terry, Head of Department in a very large comprehensive school:

"I like to maintain a friendly atmosphere, as people are much more willing to cooperate if they like you. This in no way prevents me from making clear how I want the department run. Occasionally I might have a problem with one of the older members of staff who doesn't want to change old ways. But in the end, my view prevails."

John Major, shortly after taking office as Britain's Prime Minister, when asked how he reacted to arguments in Cabinet:

"If you can advance an argument that is credible, if you can sustain the argument and if at the end of the day you can insist that it is done your way then that is perfectly satisfactory. I have had no difficulty in changing policy."

Arguments are seen as part of the job, and pose no problem if the male subordinate is willing to concede the boss is right in the end. Remember, this is the view of the male boss dealing with disagreement from a male subordinate. For what the subordinate thinks, go to Your Boss is a Baboon.

The Female Boss

To the extent that a woman has power in any organisation, her subordinates naturally have to take notice of what she says. But it is noticeable that if that subordinate is a man, he will question her decisions and argue with her in a way he would not if his boss were a man. Deborah Tannen notes that when a woman takes on a role or job previously held by a man, she begins her work "with an aura of suspicion about whether she is up to the job". Co-workers press her to justify her decisions, and this very questioning becomes interpreted as evidence that really she is incompetent. This is the Gender Game in action.

Through the Looking-Glass

Various psychological studies have shown that women tend to be more considerate, understanding and generally nicer to their subordinates than do men.

This does not always lead to women being valued. Nor does every subordinate see them that way! See Chapters 21 and 22 in the book for further details.

The Female Boss

Women in charge of men:

Provoking the Gender Game

Ros (in her 40s) is a publisher who hired Tony (30) as an experienced DTP (Desk Top Publishing) operator.

"I know he was anxious to show how creative he could be, and I encouraged him to come up with new ideas. [...] But he spent so much time arguing that his ideas were better, his quality control slipped badly.[...] In the end, I had to give him an ultimatum. I know every boss has to take a firm hand sometimes, but it did seem to me he spent much of his time fighting the fact he had a woman boss, and trying to assert his own control. It's very tiring having to deal with that nonsense."

Agnes agrees. She appointed a new male member of staff to a health service clinic. A series of confrontations ensued.

"He seemed to think that because he was the only man around, he could challenge any decision I came to. Every meeting was a battle, which I'm not used to because we work together and decide together how best to proceed. For some reason he thought this indicated I was weak. He'll learn. In the end I told him straight. Stick to your onions, laddo, you know what you've been hired to do, and you haven't been hired to run this place. Argue? God, that man must be surrounded by lamed donkeys. I can't be doing with this kind of hassle."

One purpose of the Gender Game as played by the male subordinate is to wear his boss out, undermine her confidence, ensure that everyone realizes no woman can be as good as a man in a man's world.

Most of the women I interviewed found that their first experience of dealing with male staff was exhausting, and they were inclined to wonder if they were doing things wrong. Further experience, though, showed them that men always do seem to argue more with a woman boss. Never having actually heard the term Gender Game, they nevertheless began to realize they were on the receiving end of a power ploy, and they stopped letting it worry them.

Joan, office manager in a medium-sized manufacturing plant, with several male subordinates:

"Ted in the print room, he'll argue as a matter of course whenever you give him a new job. I can't give you an example, there are just so many, I take no notice. When he's had his say, off he goes and the job is done. That's what counts. It's the same with all of them. Lighten up, I tell them. Be glad I'm not giving you your cards."

So Joan obliquely reminds them of her powers, and the men's attempts at playing the Gender Game lose out to the demands of hierarchy.

The Female Boss

Woman to Woman:

Ruling by Consent

Many women pride themselves on not using the hard tactics we saw men using with them, and their attitude towards power is more that it is consensual rather than coercive.

Vera, who is in charge of about 20 people (mostly women) in a private health service provider, told me she tries to avoid argument with her staff whenever possible:

"I like to think my staff are happy working for me, and that they can come to me if they have problems. Our bosses are always piling on the work without any warning, and often I feel the pressures are quite unnecessary, so I feel I must protect my staff if I can. I don't think I have arguments - except with people outside the department. I discuss the work with my people and then they know what is needed, and can get on with it."

Peggy runs a successful boutique in the West Country, with a small staff of all women

"I don't have arguments with the staff, they like working here, and we all enjoy working together. Customers are our problem. Of course, sometimes there might be a problem about shifts, and I might have to put my foot down if a reasonable discussion doesn't sort it. But they all understand. I am in charge, but I don't push it unless I have to."

Women tend to use discussion with their subordinates as a way of ensuring their secretary, PA or other member of staff understands what is required and is willing to carry out the agreed procedure. However, the woman does expect things to be done the way she asks, even if she asks rather than orders. If they are not, and the subordinate argues, she can be very angry.

Some women do have a problem with following instructions they think are mistaken or unnecessary, especially if the instruction comes from a woman.

This is a reflection of the attitude which says women should provide a service, and men should give the orders. Lots of women believe this too because they have never examined the bases for this belief, and so they resent having to carry out the instructions of a woman. They feel but cannot say (because that would reveal its absurdity): "Who does she think she is, giving me orders? She thinks she's so wonderful. But I know better."

Taking a Tougher Attitude

Not every woman believes in consensus, of course: indeed, Margaret Thatcher argued, when Britain's Prime Minister, that aiming at consensus is "wet". And as one woman financial manager said:

"It's pleasant to be liked, but there's a job to do. A woman who doesn't understand that she must do as I say because I say so has no place in my department."

Women who take this tougher approach may find their subordinates resist unless they have the real clout that comes with being Prime Minister or Chief Executive of an organisation.

Dr Helena Daly, a consultant haemotologist at Treliske Hospital in Cornwall, discovered that modeling her behaviour on her male teachers led to disaster. Whereas male doctors could "bark orders" and expect immediate compliance, she found the nurses simply would not do as she said. Her forceful approach eventually led to her being sacked (in July 1993) on the grounds she upset nurses by her brusque manner, and was "rude". I have never come across a man being fired because he was "rude" to subordinates, though heaven knows that many men are offensive and gratuitously insulting.

Dr Daly is not alone: other women have been sacked because of their abrasive manner in a wide variety of occupations, from editor of a provincial newspaper to supervisor on a factory production line. While men can choose whether to be authoritarian or not without losing the services of their female staff (even if women don't like being ordered about), women in charge of female staff can find themselves more or less forced into adopting a style that reflects underlying assumptions about women's nature if they are to get cooperation. Women expect other women to be considerate of feelings and relationships, whoever they are.

The Female Boss

The Female Gender Game 1: - "I'll be Mother"

Muriel is in her fifties, and runs a hotel in a holiday area. Her work is seasonal, and so she finds she must hire staff for the summer and then lay them off, on a regular basis.

"These days, men down here have such a hard time finding work they are willing to take on jobs they'd have left to their wives in the past. I like to have a mixed staff, so I have been taking on men for the dining room and the kitchen, but it does seem to have created difficulties I could do without. [...] What I have found is if I treat them all like children with me as the all-embracing Mum, then they are all happy. That's something they can understand, me as a mother figure. So - who cares? If it makes them happy. So long as they do the job, I don't mind acting warm and caring."

Women who adopt warm motherly personas are more likely to reach and hang on to powerful positions, whether in business or in government. One woman U.S. Senator said:

"It is when you want to break away from this momma leader model that the problems start."

Barbara Bush ensured her popularity with the voting public by adopting the persona of "First Granny" ("She's won the heart of a nation", wrote journalist Joy Billington in Woman's Journal).

Women as mothers and grandmothers are acceptable in decision-making situations because they are expected to make decisions which are in the best interests of their adopted children. The implications of the Gender Game are that leaders who depend on votes, and bosses who depend on cooperation, have to accommodate the prejudices and assumptions of those whose support they need.

More details in Chapter 21.

Ella, a financial manager:

"It was only when I hit my forties that I started to have problems. I was concentrating on my competence, and realized I was coming across as dominant and frightening - not the way to win people over. I did a bit of experimenting, and realized that men had been able to accept me when I was sexy, but age had caught up. All that was left was some older woman image. Motherly seemed to work best. Warm, caring, I'll take care of your problems. They love it. Who cares if it works?"

The Female Boss

The Female Gender Game 2: - Sex and Power

Some very successful women choose to play a different version of the Gender Game, one that emphasises sex rather than motherhood. Here I do mean sex.

When Fortune magazine sought out super-successful women ("the ones who blast through glass ceilings, achieve otherworldly feats, and take astronomical risks to boldly go where no man has gone before"), almost the first point they make is that their chosen seven "use their sexuality" to gain and keep their power.

Jill Barad, 45, who made Barbie the world's best-selling toy, CEO of Mattel:

"We never gave up our femininity. We didn't become little men. I don't care to get on an equal footing with men."

She and Linda Marcelli, a flamboyant curly-haired blonde who heads up Merrill Lynch, New York branch, both take advantage of an odd double standard - they will hug and kiss their clients and their colleagues. Men who touch women risk accusations of sexual harassment; women who touch men create warmth and affection, which is, as we have seen, what women are expected to do.

Age does not inevitably lead to loss of charm either. All the women featured were over 40, and Charlotte Beers, CEO of the advertising agency Ogilvy & Mather, was 61, but according to Fortune, "to most men she's beguiling". One of her clients is quoted as saying:

"Charlotte, more than anyone in the business, wants to seduce. There's something deep about Charlotte, and also frivolous. She is a woman, a woman, a woman."

Charlotte Beers believes a leader should inspire, forget how things "should be done":

"I believe in provocative disruption."

Their approach provides ammunition for those men who fear that women have an unfair advantage in the workplace - but does this matter when most of the unfair advantage at the moment is on the other side? Sexual tension exists whenever women and men have to work together so that emphasising their sexuality is only making overt what is implicit. These women are playing the Gender Game the way men play - for success and power.

The View from Below

Men Coping with the Bitch: Men with a Female Boss

According to a survey in 1990, no self-respecting man would take orders from a woman younger than himself, and many would "do anything" to avoid working under a woman of any age.

"Everyone knows men are cleverer, anyway." (Male legal executive, 32).

The same prejudices were surviving up to 1998 when War of Words was published. Will the new millenium make a difference?

Women bosses find their male subordinates argue at the drop of a hat The men talk about "it" becoming "confrontational".

"She'll ask for suggestions, then ignore them. Then it gets confrontational. In the end, you have to agree because arguing gets you nowhere." (Brian, 34)
"Professional differences of opinion become conflict. She perceives it as a personal threat and finds it difficult to accept an alternative opinion. She immediately takes on an offended tone of voice, and sometimes it ends in tears." (John, 30).

Really? No woman I ever met said she had broken down in tears at work. No woman in any position of authority is likely, on the balance of probabilities, to start weeping because one of her staff disagrees with her. Perhaps those tears are not literal tears, but an echo of that phrase so often used in our childhood: it will all end in tears. It echoes, too, the cliché that women are always liable to burst into tears, and is yet another move in the Gender Game.

The View from Below

Woman to Woman: Bitch or Human Being?

Some women bosses are valued for their considerate caring style.

Karen says of her boss:

"She's very honest with me; there is no kind of hidden agenda. She's more truthful as regards the hierarchy, and more open. With men it's a lot more political. She'll tell me what I need to know. I trust her. She's also very loyal."

Others though are severely criticised for being bitchy, even "inhuman".

Janice: "She doesn't seem to care about us as people. Shirley, her deputy, always asks after the children. I'd much rather work for her."

I asked if she would expect a man to ask after the children, but she claimed the men in the office were "more human - you can talk to them".

"It's more of a surprise when a man asks how you are. You expect it of a woman somehow."

This is a woman playing a Gender Game on behalf of men - but without realizing it.

Women are also often disgruntled because they are inclined to think their women bosses are not up to their jobs. They are "incompetent", often "not very bright" and frequently "muddled". See comments by Ann, Sharon, Fenella in Chapter 22: also Susan and Edith's fears of "being exploited".

The View from Below

Man to Man: Your Boss is a Baboon

Though seeing a male boss as "a baboon" is not quite as cliche-ridden as seeing a female boss as a bitch, the general attitude it sums up is widely understood. Paul Mungo, the writer of the article from which this title is taken, claims that office politics are based on the animal instinct to struggle for dominance:

"By and large, we are just fairly sophisticated brainy primates with big penises."

No, a woman cannot be a baboon.

Mike's diary does give the impression he is operating in a jungle, and he might well accept an image of his own boss as posturing primate. He reports a series of arguments with his boss during the week, starting on Monday morning with a dispute about a report Mike had written:

"I had included some sensitive financial data in my report to senior management, to make a point about the way our business is run. Boss wanted to conceal the information. He was not prepared to listen."

Arguments with a subordinate are seen as challenges, to which the boss responds vigorously. Mike's next confrontation was that afternoon, during a "normal review of business development":

"We argued about customer acceptance of new products. He was so angry he was only interested in shouting and recrimination, so logical argument was pointless."

Next day, there is another confrontation, about "poor sales performance".

The arguments are strong, sometimes heated, and Mike is very angry each time. He does not get his point across on any occasion. By the end of the week, when Mike is trying to put some fresh ideas about contacting new customers his boss doesn't want to know. But Mike continues to present himself as concerned about the business, and even though he was "very angry" and dealing with a boss who apparently did not listen to him, he did not use the language of outrage some of the women used when reporting arguments with their women bosses. There is a greater acceptance among all the men who sent diaries, or whom I interviewed, that argument is one of the things you expect from your male superior.

Subordinates were not always expecting to convince the boss anyway. Colin, a 25-year-old computer programmer, wrote:

"I got the point across only in the sense that he understood my reasons; but he did not accept that they were correct. We agreed to disagree because when the program is written, it will speak for itself. I argued because I felt I had a valid point; and also, if I am correct, it will mean large problems for the practicality of the programs we are currently writing."

Sometimes the point of the argument is that the subordinate wants something the boss has not yet decided to give: more resources, more staff, special equipment. These negotiations are usually low key.

Academics, on the other hand, do not behave aggressively "like a baboon" when arguing about research. Indeed, even more than in almost any other profession, criticism, challenge and debate are expected among those involved in scientific research, and as Estelle Phillips and D.S. Pugh put it, "this non-deferential activity is an accepted part of the academic process". Canadian psychologist Ben Slugoski, talking about arguing with his superior, told me:

"I would never get angry over academic issues, both stands in the eyes of God are wrong."

This does not mean that academic arguments do not matter, nor that they never create upset and ill-feeling, nor indeed, that superiors do not try to impose their views on their subordinates. Arguments among scientists and academics can be very important, lead to anger and strong resentment, though this is usually among equals. Though many a superior has been known to dominate his researchers, the subordinate seems to accept this as a way of life and show no anger. John McKinlay, a medical statistician, explains:

"The high testosterone male attempts to influence and control other people. He likes to win arguments."

Whether this is because of his testosterone or whether it is because men expect to try to dominate is not clear, but men's belief that this is typically male behaviour reinforces that behaviour wherever it can be seen to work.

Being a male boss is certainly easier than being a female one, if what one's subordinates say about their relationships is anything to go by. The only time that a male subordinate in my research showed any sign of outrage and resentment was when his future appeared to be in jeopardy.

Men rarely talk of being friendly with their boss, even though the boss may talk of being on friendly terms with his staff. Being a subordinate is something of which they are constantly aware. Terry, the Head of Department we met in the section on bosses arguing with their subordinates, told me of an argument he had with his own boss, the Head of the school. This was, he said, "completely absurd":

"I was teaching a particular play at A-level, and it came in a paperback with two other plays not on the syllabus. Apparently a parent complained that one of the other plays contained swearing and the Head wanted me to go through all 22 books inking out all the "fucks". I pointed out that this would simply draw attention to what he wanted to hide, and the chances were much greater that none of the students would even look at the other plays otherwise. They don't usually read more than one asks! But the best compromise I could get was that I would go through a "master copy" blacking out all the words he wanted to hide, and some other unfortunate from the office would take my copy and censor the rest of the books. I certainly wasn't prepared to waste my time, and he accepted that. My 6th form thought it a great joke. Of course. The man meant well."

No, he didn't remember being very angry. It was so absurd, he thought it almost amusing. Why did he go along with the censorship? Well, the Head was his boss, and he had the right to issue an order, however ridiculous. Did he act like a baboon, metaphorically beating his chest and strutting to show his power? Terry obviously found the picture hilarious. When he stopped laughing, he explained:

"He's always oversensitive to complaints from parents, however ridiculous. If I were in his shoes, I would act differently. But I would never undermine his authority. He is the Head."

Which brings us back to hierarchies. Terry negotiated a compromise, but would not actually refuse to do something he thought absurd because he accepts the Head's authority as Head. So some men may act like baboons in the jungle, and it seems likely that the pressures of commercial organisations encourage aggressive behaviour. But certainly not every boss behaves that way. The important thing is that subordinates accept the authority of the man in charge, even if they are certain they would do the job better.