Are You the Colleague Everyone Respects — Or Just Likes?

Close to nine out of ten people hold at least one bias against women. The United Nations Development Programme’s data covers 85% of the world’s population. This is not a matter of individual opinion; it is a measurable social norm. In your office, it manifests as a persistent double bind: be competent and risk being seen as cold, or be warm and risk being seen as less capable.

The research gives this bind a shape: the warmth–competence matrix. Social psychologist Susan T. Fiske’s work shows that people everywhere judge others along these two dimensions. Warmth is about trust and intent—whether you are liked. Competence is about ability and effectiveness—whether you are respected. For women, these dimensions often work against each other. A manager who is identically successful as a male peer is rated as less likeable and less desirable as a boss, unless she also explicitly signals communal traits. Her success implies a warmth deficit.

The daily cost is visible in data. The 2024 Women in the Workplace report found 39% of women say they are interrupted or spoken over more than others, compared to 20% of men. Thirty-eight percent have their judgement questioned in their area of expertise, compared to 26% of men. Twenty-three percent of working women report being treated as if they are not competent because of their gender; for men, it is 6%.

You are negotiating this matrix every day. Your behaviour in meetings, how you claim credit, where you set boundaries—these are signals that get categorised. The question is not whether you are good at your job. It is how you are perceived while doing it, and what that perception costs you in influence, support, and advancement.

Eight questions. Under two minutes. You might not love the answer.

More Quizzes

What Your Result Means

Respected & Liked. You consistently signal both high competence and high warmth. Your colleagues likely trust your judgement and want you on their projects. This is the most advantageous position, but it requires deliberate maintenance. The research behind the Stereotype Content Model indicates warmth is often judged first; you have established trust, which makes your competence more acceptable. The risk here is burnout from the constant effort of balancing both signals. One thing to do this week: audit your commitments. Identify one piece of ‘invisible work’ you do—like organising team morale or mentoring—and document its impact in one sentence. This makes the warmth work visible as a competence.

Respected, Not Liked. You are seen as highly capable but potentially cold or unapproachable. This often happens when you prioritise task delivery and clarity over relationship-building, especially under pressure. The cost is real: the BIAS Map model predicts that low warmth triggers active harm, like resentment or sabotage, not just passive neglect. Madeline Heilman’s research on the ‘implied communality deficit’ shows successful women in male-typed roles are penalised on likeability. Your competence may shield you from some challenges, but it limits your access to advocacy and spontaneous support. This week, add one warm-signalling sentence to your standard feedback or email style. For example, precede a critique with “I appreciate the effort on this, and to make it stronger…” It is a small, repeatable adjustment.

Liked, Not Respected. You are perceived as warm and collegial, but not particularly competent or authoritative. This pattern emerges from consistently saying yes to helping others, avoiding conflict, and dissolving your own contributions into the team narrative. The Role Congruity Theory explains this as an over-adherence to communal female stereotypes. The cost is professional stagnation. You may be passed over for challenging projects or promotions because you are not seen as capable of hard decisions. The McKinsey data shows women are already 18% more likely to be mistaken for someone much junior; this perception exacerbates that. This week, practise claiming one piece of work. In a meeting or email, use “I” instead of “we” for a specific task you led: “I analysed the data and found…”

Neither Respected Nor Liked. This is a dangerous quadrant, often resulting from inconsistent or mismatched signals. You may be perceived as neither effective nor trustworthy. This can happen if you are new to a team, operate in a highly biased environment, or if your attempts to assert competence come across as abrasive without the relational cushion to offset them. The cost is isolation and a lack of influence. People may actively avoid working with you. The first step is not to signal more, but to rebuild one dimension consistently. Choose warmth, as it is processed faster. This week, initiate one low-stakes, positive interaction with a colleague—a genuine compliment on their work or an offer to grab coffee. Do not tie it to a request.

Adjusting Your Signals

Pre-empt interruptions by setting terms at the start of a meeting. Say, “I’ll take us through three points, and I’d appreciate questions at the end.” This is a competence signal that establishes your authority over the agenda. The BIAS Map links competence to passive facilitation; structuring the conversation is a facilitative act that also commands respect. When you are interrupted, a simple “Just let me finish this point” reclaims the floor without aggression. The data shows interruptions are a key metric where women’s competence is undermined; controlling the format is a direct counter.

When sharing a win, use a “credit sandwich.” State your contribution clearly, then name others who helped, then loop back to the outcome. For example: “I built the financial model that showed the 15% saving. Sarah’s market analysis was crucial for the inputs. Together, that let us secure the budget.” This balances self-promotion with communal credit. Laurie Rudman’s research on self-promotion identifies it as a risk for women, but one that can be mitigated by appearing helpful. The sandwich structure makes your individual competence visible while reinforcing team cohesion.

If your judgement is questioned, respond with facts first, then invite collaboration. “The data source is our internal Q4 report, page six. I’m happy to walk you through my reasoning if you see a different angle.” This asserts your expertise (competence) while remaining open (warmth). It avoids defensiveness, which can read as low competence, and avoids immediate concession, which erodes respect. A 2023 Syndio study on workplace equity would frame this as maintaining professional standing while de-escalating conflict.

Schedule five minutes for small talk at the start of one-on-one meetings. I put it in the calendar invite: “2:00 – 2:05, catch-up; 2:05 – 2:25, agenda.” This contains warmth work so it does not bleed into deep work time, making it sustainable. It also makes the transition to task-focused discussion clear, which is a competence signal. For someone in the ‘Respected, Not Liked’ quadrant, this ritualised approach feels less forced than spontaneous rapport-building.

Practise saying no with a clear reason and an alternative. “I can’t take on the full report by Friday, but I can draft the executive summary for you to expand.” This sets a boundary (competence) while offering a solution (warmth). Women are often socialised to give a full, apologetic explanation, which can weaken the signal. A short, fact-based reason—“my current project deadline is Thursday”—is sufficient. It manages expectations and protects your capacity to deliver on core responsibilities, which builds long-term respect.

Before a high-stakes conversation, write down three concrete examples of your competence relevant to the topic. If you are discussing a promotion, list a delivered project, a solved problem, and a positive metric. This prepares you to cite evidence quickly, which projects confidence. Alice Eagly’s Role Congruity Theory notes that women face prejudice for agentic behaviour; anchoring your case in indisputable facts makes your competence less arguable and reduces the space for bias to influence the discussion.

Ask for specific feedback on your contributions, not just your collaborative style. Phrase it as, “On the X project, what was one thing about my analysis that was most useful, and one thing I could have made stronger?” This directs the conversation toward your competence and frames you as someone focused on efficacy. It also gives you quotable competence endorsements you can use later. Passive hope that ‘good work speaks for itself’ is a strategy that fails when warmth signals drown out competence signals.

Use your physical presentation to anchor your perceived status, which is strongly linked to competence. Research testing the Stereotype Content Model across cultures found that perceived status correlates almost perfectly with ascribed competence (average r = .90). Dressing slightly above your current level, in polished business casual or sharp corporate outfits, is a passive competence signal that works in the background. It pre-empts the all-too-common experience of being mistaken for someone more junior.

Understand that ‘likeability’ is often conditional. The Ambivalent Sexism Theory framework distinguishes between hostile sexism (punishing women who deviate from tradition) and benevolent sexism (rewarding women who conform). Being “liked” can sometimes mean you are being placed in a restrictive, non-threatening box. If you notice your likeability dips only when you are assertive or direct, it may reflect this bias. The solution isn’t to stop being assertive, but to pair it with warmth signals you control, like acknowledging a colleague’s point before presenting your counter-argument.

Mitigate the backlash effect when claiming credit. Studies on the backlash against agentic women show that self-promotion can carry a social cost. You can offset this by framing your achievement as a team win you facilitated, or by linking it to a shared goal. Instead of “I secured the client,” try “My focus on the client’s sustainability goals helped us secure the deal, which benefits the whole team’s targets.” This uses a communal frame to deliver an agentic message.

Prepare for the “think leader-think male” bias with evidence. A meta-analysis on leader stereotypes found the association between “male” and “leader” (ICC = .62) is much stronger than between “female” and “leader” (ICC = .25). Before a leadership presentation or interview, consciously counter this by using more authority-signalling language. State conclusions definitively, use downward comparisons (“This approach is stronger than the alternative”), and hold the physical space—stand when presenting, even if others are seated. Consider a definitive business formal piece like a blazer to visually anchor your authority.

Sources

United Nations Development Programme. (2023). Breaking Down Gender Biases: 2023 Gender Social Norms Index (GSNI). https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/2023-06/2023_gender_social_norms_index_embargoed.pdf

McKinsey & Company and LeanIn.Org. (2024). Women in the Workplace 2024: The 10th-anniversary report. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/featured%20insights/diversity%20and%20inclusion/women%20in%20the%20workplace%202024%20the%2010th%20anniversary%20report/women-in-the-workplace-2024.pdf

Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2007). Why Are Women Penalized for Success at Male Tasks? The Implied Communality Deficit. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://www.jeffreycjohnson.org/app/download/764621134/WOMEN%2BAND%2BSUCCESS.pdf

Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661306003299

Koenig, A. M., Eagly, A. H., Mitchell, A. A., & Ristikari, T. (2011). Are Leader Stereotypes Masculine? A Meta-Analysis of Three Research Paradigms. Psychological Bulletin. https://www.tjsl.edu/sites/default/files/anne_m._koenig_et_al._are_leader_stereotypes_masculine_a_meta-analysis_of_three_research_paradigms_1374_psychol._bull._616_2011.pdf