Equity Isn’t a Zero-Sum Game

By: Kaylin Baker-Fields

Gender equity can often feel like walking a tightrope. On one side is the urgent need to accelerate progress for women. On the other hand, there is a growing resistance that threatens to stall that progress. Lisa Kaplowitz, Executive Director of Rutgers University’s Center for Women in Business (CWIB), has devoted her career to studying this challenge. Her research with CWIB offers a roadmap for leaders to navigate the complex dynamics of equity efforts without deepening polarization.

“We’re living in echo chambers,” Lisa says. “Social media, the news…everything seems to reinforce a division, and focus more on how we’re different instead of how we’re the same. And what that does is limit our exposure to viewpoints that might be different from ours”.

Her recent research, developed in collaboration with postdoctoral fellow Colleen Tolan, bridges the gap between gender equity and communication and conflict studies. It highlights the core issue that perceptions of progress matter just as much as the policies themselves. Lisa says, “Most Americans think women are doing well, but over half believe men’s progress has stalled or reversed. Men say things are moving too fast. Women say, not fast enough.”

This gap in perception fuels what Lisa calls zero-sum thinking — the belief that gains for one group come at a loss for another — a false idea she says leadership must reject.

“This isn’t about taking something away from one group to give to another,” she says. “It’s about making sure the most qualified person gets the opportunity. That’s what equity means.”

Rethinking How We Talk About Opportunities

Changing the narrative starts with language, and often, with the small signals embedded in hiring and evaluation practices. Job descriptions, for instance, may unintentionally deter candidates based on how they’re written. She explains how words like “dominate,” “compete,” and “drive” resonate more with men, while women often respond to collaborative and team-focused language. Examples include phrases such as “Let’s work together” and “What are your thoughts?”, and using “we” instead of “you” or “I” to emphasize collective effort. 

“Men tend to respond more to ‘agenic’ language. Women respond more to communal language. Including both in job descriptions signals that the role welcomes different approaches,” she explains.

Another subtle barrier is inflated job requirements. “Research shows women usually apply only if they meet 100 per cent of the criteria. Men will apply if they think they meet the 60% threshold. If you list everything imaginable instead of what’s truly essential, you narrow your candidate pool before interviews even start.”

But changing language is just the beginning. Leaders need to create space to listen deeply to their teams’ lived experiences. Lisa encourages asking questions like, “Have you been interrupted in meetings? Have your ideas been dismissed or co-opted? Passed over because someone thought you weren’t committed enough due to caregiving responsibilities?”

“These aren’t accusations or blame,” she says, “They’re insights into how bias operates in real-time and how people experience the workplace differently.”

When employees feel misunderstood or isolated, team cohesion and morale suffer. This impacts retention and the ability to attract talent.

Building Brave Spaces, Not Just Safe Ones

To have honest conversations about equity, organizations need to create what Lisa calls “brave spaces”, environments where mistakes are allowed and expected, and learning is welcomed. “We have to move beyond performative safety,” she explains. “It has to be okay to get it wrong. Leaders need to show up and demonstrate that these issues truly matter. Their presence sends a powerful message.”

At Rutgers, Lisa helped develop the GAME program (Generating Allyship in Male Executives), which pairs men and women in structured conversations to build understanding. One participant said, “I didn’t realize she was the breadwinner.” Another admitted, “I thought she wouldn’t want to travel because she has kids.” These common assumptions often shape workplace decisions, but usually stem from limited exposure to others’ realities.

Employee resource groups (ERGs) also play a critical role in advancing equity, she notes, but are yet another tool leaders frequently overlook. These groups, too often, depend on unpaid, extra work, often from women and marginalized employees. Lisa calls this invisible labour “office housework” and stresses the need for fair compensation. “If this work matters, pay for it,” she insists. “Include it in performance evaluations and recognize it as a leadership pipeline.”

Changing Culture Around Caregiving

Lisa is a strong advocate for policies like parental leave and flexible work, but she’s quick to point out that policy alone isn’t enough. Without cultural buy-in, even the most progressive benefits can reinforce old dynamics. 

“If only women take leave, it reinforces bias,” she says. “But when everyone takes leave, caregiving becomes normalized across genders. Men need to feel safe using these policies, too. Otherwise, caregiving stays gendered — and that holds everyone back.”

She recalls a moment from her time as a finance professor when one of her children called during class with a minor emergency. Her husband was home, but the default expectation was still to call her. “It’s conditioning,” she says. “Even our kids absorb those assumptions about who handles what.”

She and her colleague, Kate Mangino, identified 18 transferable skills developed through caregiving, ranging from emotional intelligence to strategic multitasking, grouped into categories of humanity, cognitivity, and productivity.

“These skills support stronger teams, better retention, and a healthier workplace culture,” she explains. “We need to stop seeing caregiving as a limitation and start recognizing it as a leadership strength.”

Why Asking and Listening Matters

For Lisa, one of the most important shifts leaders can make is moving from assumption to inquiry. “Don’t assume what her aspirations are or her commitment to the job,” she says. “Ask what she wants from her career. Ask what she needs to succeed.” It sounds simple, but it can be transformative. This shift opens space for real dialogue, deeper trust, and more accurate support.

It’s also how leaders begin to dismantle the hidden biases and misplaced assumptions that quietly shape decisions, from who gets stretch opportunities to who’s seen as committed. “Equity efforts stall when we make decisions based on stereotypes or silence,” she explains. “Asking creates clarity. It builds confidence. And it keeps people in the game.”

That sense of clarity is amplified when women are connected to each other. Lisa emphasizes the importance of peer support and community, not just as a feel-good resource, but as a retention and leadership strategy. “Find your community,” she says. “We’ve seen it again and again in the research. When women know they’re not alone, they show up with more confidence. They take risks. They stay. That’s how change happens—together.”

Redefining Progress Together

Despite the backlash and fatigue often surrounding equity work, Lisa remains hopeful and deeply pragmatic. She sees momentum in the rise of women across various fields, including STEM, law, and politics. She sees promise in younger generations of men who want to be more present at home, more expansive in their identities, and more values-driven in their careers.

Still, she’s clear that real progress depends on shared effort. That includes men as active participants, not just as allies in name, but as engaged partners in building workplaces where everyone can thrive. “If we frame equity as us versus them, you’re going to have half the population shut out,” she says. “What we need to do is focus on programs and policies that benefit everyone.”

Her message to leaders is simple: be curious. Be humble. Challenge your assumptions. Value the equity work already happening in your organization, and invest in it as the leadership pipeline it is.

“Equity doesn’t have to be divisive,” she says. “But it does have to be intentional. When we listen to each other — really listen — and act on what we learn, we all move forward.”