为什么女性在建筑领域的平等地位会使大家受益
Why Equal Representation for Women in Architecture is Better for Everyone

由专筑网邢子，蒋晖编译

当前关于女性在建筑行业中所处地位的争论，很少会听到关于平等是十分重要的言论。因为该言论通常被认为是一种毋庸置疑的道德标准。然而，这篇最初发表在《赫芬顿邮报》上的文章“为什么女性的领导力对建筑师至关重要”中，Lance Hosey认为，无论你在平等这一道德观点上持何种立场，女性在建筑领域更好的表现能以切实可行的方式惠及到该领域的所有人。

在今年的三月8号，我们想再次分享美国建筑师协会（AIA）的出版物“建筑行业的多样性”报告，这是十年来的第一份多样性报告。2015年12月美国建筑师协会成立了“建筑平等委员会”，由20名建筑师、教育工作者和不同领域专家组成，该委员会旨在调查建筑行业内的多样性和包容性。这份新报告记录了对7300多名不同性别的专业建筑师和学生的调查，其中79%是白人，21%是有色人种。

In the ongoing debate about women in the architecture profession, you rarely hear an argument for why equal representation is important; it's generally assumed to be an unquestionable moral imperative. However, in this article originally published on the Huffington Post as "Why Women's Leadership Is Essential for Architects," Lance Hosey argues that, regardless of your position on equality as a moral imperative, better representation of women in architecture could benefit everyone in the profession—in very tangible ways.
Today, on International Women's Day (March 8) we want to share again the American Institute of Architects (AIA) publication "Diversity in the Profession of Architecture," its first diversity report in a decade. The release follows the creation in December 2015 of the AIA's "Equity in Architecture Commission," a panel of twenty architects, educators, and diversity experts to investigate diversity and inclusion in the profession. The new report documents a survey of over 7,300 professional architects and students, including men and women, 79% of them whites and 21% people of color.


Image via The AIA's 'Diversity in the Profession of Architecture' report

正如我几年前所写的那样，这类研究基本上显示不出建筑行业的发展进程，这份新报告也一样。例如，不到四分之一的受访者认为有色人种在该领域有很好的表现。然而，大多数人表示，他们所效力的公司“对待所有人都是平等的，不分种族或民族”，虽然存在少数的不平等现象，但在很大程度上人们都受到了公平的对待。然而，男性和女性的观点却各不相同。超过三分之二的白人男性（70%）和有色人种男性（67%）同意上述观点，但却只有60-62%的女性同意，因此种族之间的差距（2-3%）要远小于性别之间的差距（7-8%）。同样，当被问及目前的公司是否“男女平等”时，有超过三分之二的男性（65-69%）表示平等，却只有一半的女性（53-55%）表示平等。

在建筑师中，性别平等比种族平等更具有挑战吗？

超过70%的女性受访者认为，女性在这个行业中所占比例过低，并有一半的人表示，她们的薪酬低于男性，同时晋升到高级职位的可能性也更小。这种说法不足为奇，男性的总体工作满意度比女性要高出6-12%，即使男性也只有大约一半（52-54%）的人对此感到满意。虽然男性和女性之间的差距令人担忧，但更令人感到忧虑的是，建筑师似乎对自己的工作现状都不太满意。在所有受访者中，只有不到一半的人（39% -45%）表示自己在做有意义的工作，只有42% -48%的人因为工作出色而得到认可，也仅有约三分之一（29% -38%）的人对自己的薪水感到满意。

As I wrote some years ago, studies of this kind generally reveal little progress in the profession, and the new report is no different. Fewer than a quarter of all respondents feel that people of color are represented well in the field, for example. However, the majority say they work for firms that "treat all equally, regardless of race or ethnicity," suggesting that minorities are underrepresented but, for the most part, treated fairly. Responses vary between men and women, however. Over two thirds of both white men (70%) and men of color (67%) agree with the above statement, while only 60-62% of women do, so the gap between races (2-3%) is much smaller than that between the sexes (7-8%). Similarly, when asked if they work for firms that "treat men and women equally," over two thirds of men (65-69%) agree, while only half of women do (53-55%).
Is gender parity a bigger challenge among architects than racial equity is?
More than 70% of female respondents feel that women are underrepresented in the profession, and half say they are paid less than men and are less likely to be promoted to senior positions. Not surprisingly, overall job satisfaction is 6-12% higher for men than it is for women. What this doesn't reveal is that, even for men, only about half (52-54%) are satisfied. While the gap between men and women is troubling, what's possibly more troubling is that architects in general don't seem very happy in their jobs. Fewer than half of all respondents, male and female, report doing meaningful work (39-45%) or being recognized for doing their jobs well (42-48%), and about a third (29-38%) are happy with their salaries.


Image via The AIA's 'Diversity in the Profession of Architecture' report

2015年，AIA主席Elizabeth Chu Richter在报告的前言中写道，建筑师“必须是我们所服务的对象的一面镜子”。类别的多样性本身是很重要，但是，就像这类研究经常出现的情况一样，报告和媒体的报道总是停留在缺乏多样性上，同时也没有彻底解释为什么多样性是重要的，即使大家都心知肚明。

报告中显示不论在任何领域，多元化的种族公司都要胜过竞争对手35%，而性别平等的公司还要更高出15%。人才创新中心也表示当公司“给予不同的声音平等的重视”，他们的创造力和创新潜力也会加倍。

2015 AIA president Elizabeth Chu Richter writes in the Foreword to the report that architects "must be a mirror of the rich human tapestry we serve." Diversity is important in its own right, but, as is often the case with studies of this kind, the report and media coverage dwell on a lack of diversity without thoroughly explaining why diversity is important. But the evidence is abundant.
Ethnically diverse companies in any field are 35% more likely to outperform their competitors, and gender-balanced companies are 15% more likely, according to reports. Organizations also double their potential for creativity and innovation when they "give diverse voices equal airtime" (Center for Talent Innovation).


Image via The AIA's 'Diversity in the Profession of Architecture' report

在所有类型的公司中，女性对多元性都特别重要。研究也表明女性能提高经济、社会和环境的整体三重底线：

经济影响：研究表明，女性高管越多的公司，销售额、投资回报率、利润和生产率都会大幅度提高。2014年的一项研究发现，董事会中女性成员越多的公司，财务状况就越稳定，也会承担更小的风险。既然女性更加重要，那么如果有更多的女性担任公司的领导职位，建筑师的薪水会更高吗？

社会影响：越多的女性进入管理层会带来更高的员工参与度，也会让员工更普遍地感觉到公司对员工的关心。研究表明，在一个组织中有更多的女性，也会为整个员工创造更多的团队自信心、更高的心理安全、更低的流动率以及更好的招聘条件。随着更多女性进入建筑师行业，建筑师的工作满意度可能会有所提高。

环境影响：正如《绿色女性：可持续设计之声》（2007）一书中指出的那样，女性比男性更有可能通过她们的工作、消费选择、投票以及行动来支持环境事业。女性的平均碳足迹远低于男性，尽管她们对科学了解较少，但男性对气候变化持怀疑态度。更多的女性参与领导，可以很好地改善建筑师在可持续发展方面进展缓慢的状况。

美国建筑师协会的报告强调了建筑界女性面临的三个障碍：对工作与生活平衡的担忧、“让组建家庭变得困难、从而鼓励一些女性离开这个领域”的过长工作时间以及缺乏灵活性。因此，研究结果表明为了吸引和留住更多的女性，这个职业必须更好地促进工作与生活之间地平衡，并且增加工作灵活性。这与其他领域促进更强大的文化、更好的福利以及平等薪酬的建议是同样的道理。

无论采取何种策略，建筑行业都迫切需要更多的多样性。正如里克特所说，“我们周围的世界变化得很快，我们也可以做得更好。”

Women are especially important to diversity in any type of company, since studies show they improve the entire triple bottom line of social, economic, and environmental value:

Economic impact: According to research, companies with more women in senior management enjoy higher sales, return on investment, profit, and productivity—by wide margins. A 2014 study found that organizations with more women on their boards are more financially stable and less prone to excessive risk-taking. Since women are better for the bottom line, would architects enjoy better salaries if more women held leadership positions in their firms?
Social impact: More women in management leads to higher employee engagement and a more widespread sense that the organization cares about the staff. Research shows that having more women in an organization also creates more team self-confidence, higher psychological safety, lower turnover rates, and better recruitment—for the whole staff. Architects' low job satisfaction might improve with more women leading the profession.
Environmental impact: As Kira Gould and I show in our book, Women in Green: Voices of Sustainable Design (2007), women are much more likely than men to support environmental causes—through their work, consumer choices, voting, and activism. The average carbon footprint of women is considerably lower than that of the men, who are more skeptical about climate change, although they understand the science less. More women in leadership could very well improve architects' slow rate of progress on sustainability.

The AIA report highlights three obstacles for women in architecture: concern about work-life balance, long work hours "that make starting a family difficult and thereby encourage some women to leave the field," and lack of flexibility. Accordingly, the study concludes that in order to attract and retain more women the profession must promote better work-life balance and increase job flexibility. This is consistent with recommendations in other fields to promote stronger cultures, better benefits, and pay equity.
Whatever the strategy, the profession of architecture urgently needs more diversity. As Richter has put it, "The world around us is changing much faster and we can do better."