By Bradley Rosenberg

There are very few things that men and women have in common. They don’t think the same, they don’t enjoy the same types of movies, they don’t even have the same amount of ribs. What they do have in common, though, according to a recent study by Northeastern University, is the desire for emotional fulfillment in their jobs.

This emotional fulfillment or “socio-emotional satisfaction,” as it’s called in the study, greatly affects a person’s contentment with his/her job and, in turn, whether that person decides to stay in the job or not. These socio-emotional satisfiers can come in the form of friendly and supportive co-workers, a meaningful team position, a person’s worth in helping others, and the value that a company places on its employees. Women were originally thought to value these satisfiers more than men, while men were originally thought to value status-based satisfiers, or the importance and responsibility of a position. This recent study has since disproved that stereotype. According to the study, women only value socio-emotional satisfiers slightly more than men.

Professor Kimberly Eddleston, an assistant business professor for Northeastern’s College of Business Administration, began her research on the topic because “a lot of literature [previous to this study] assumed that women wanted social relationships [at work] while men wanted money, power, [and] things like that.” Eddleston, who recalled the corporate ambition of many of her female friends, didn’t believe that was so, and, as such, she set out to find the truth. She originally predicted, before she began her research, that “it [wouldn’t be] so much gender that determines [these satisfiers, but] rather … gender identity.”

“Your gender identity is set at age 14,” she says. “Socialization plays a much stronger role than gender or biological [classification.]”

What she found, though, completely confuted both the previously held beliefs of business and her hypothesis.

By gathering responses from 420 managers in a variety of fields, Eddleston found that “females valued status-based awards just as much as men.”

The study also found that those most concerned with status-based career satisfaction cared little about socio-emotional factors, and that those with heavy interest in socio-emotional factors were hardly influenced by status. Eddleston states that “organizations who ignore [one] and not [the other] have a hard time retaining [employees.]”

Eddleston has also recently completed a study on whether or not exposure to top executives helps an employee progress in his/her career. What she found is of great consequence to women concerned with status-based satisfiers.

“What we found is that men and women in the same job, who both had access to … top executives, [otherwise know as] the dominant coalition … had different [effects from that relationship] in relation to their gender,” Eddleston says. “Men who had access to the dominant coalition got promotions and higher salaries. Women who had access had no impact on their careers.”

Eddleston feels that the knowledge behind both of these studies will have a positive impact on women, and that, “as competition [amongst] organizations increases, these things will become very important.”

“Keeping management committed to an organization means giving them the career awards they want,” Eddleston says. She’s hoping her study is not taken by corporations as a rib.

For a copy of Eddleston’s “socio-satisfiers” report, visit www.nupr.neu.edu.