*Participant Profiles*

The 24 women in the study were previously or are currently highly successful in a variety of industries. Many of them have attained the highest positions possible in the corporate and non-profit arenas. Some of them have held critical roles for their organizations throughout the Americas, Europe, and Asia. They have all led interesting and multifaceted lives. Twenty-one (86%) combined their careers with families and three (13%) were the primary providers of the family while their partners were the caretakers of the children. Two of the participants were supported by their partners when they relocated their families overseas for career opportunities. One traveled abroad extensively, and her partner was the primary stay-at-home parent.

Fourteen (58%) of the women in the study are currently married, and all but three have children. Five (21%) are divorced, four (17%) are single, and one is a widower. The typical participant had 6–10 years of experience and an advanced degree. Seventeen (71%) women hold advanced degrees, including three with PhD degrees, two with the JD, and 12 have master's degrees. Figure 1 shows participant education levels. Eleven (46%) of the participants are in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States, four (17%) are in the Southeast, four (17%) are on the West Coast, two (8%) are in the Northwest, and two (8.3%) are in the Northeast.

**Figure 1.** Participant Education Levels.

The women are diverse ethnically and culturally and range widely in age. Two-thirds of the women, 15 (63%), are White; five (21%) are Black: and the remaining women included two (8%) Latinx and two (8%) of Asian descent. While not planned, the race/ethnicity of the women closely reflected the current general population of women in senior leadership positions in the United States. Two (8%) women are ages 35–42, four (17%) are ages 43–50, seven (29%) are 51–58, with the balance of 11 (46%) at 59–70+. The age distribution is reasonable for a group where one-third (33%) of the women have 21+ years of senior management experience. Two (8%) have 11–14 years, seven (29%) have 6–10, and the remaining seven (29%) have 1–5 years of experience. Figure 2 presents the participant years of senior management experience.

**Figure 2.** Participant Years of Senior Management Experience.

During the interviews, participants were asked to define their experience of disrespect on a continuum from low levels of disrespect (high respect) to high levels of disrespect (low respect) and give examples of each level. The interviews produced narratives containing rich descriptions of how these participants' lived experiences led to their professional success. They shared childhood experiences and described the significant people or support groups who influenced their resilience and desire to thrive. They shared their perspectives on the barriers that they experienced in the workplace and how the support (e. g., work-life balance) they created helped them to maintain their mental and physical well-being.

#### **3. Findings and Discussion**

Exploring the factors that impact the resilience of women leaders was accomplished by examining how ongoing experiences of disrespect in the workplace influenced their behaviors and actions over time. The participants dealt with disrespectful situations in various ways during different periods in their lives. For example, one participant began the interview with a low level of self-confidence because she had recently been unexpectedly laid off from a senior vice president position of 20+ years. Toward the end of the interview she said, "As a woman raising children, you forget who you are and how you've bounced back from many professional situations earlier in your career. This process has reminded me of who I am and what I am capable of achieving."

Findings from the interviews were designed to elicit descriptors of the participants' experiences of disrespect. The findings were identified from themes that emerged from the patterns in the data. The data were coded to indicate the participants' descriptions of their experiences in senior leadership positions in their respective workplaces.

The themes and descriptors are presented below in Table 2. Both themes and descriptors are presented in the order of their significance to the research question. The data suggested that specific descriptors within the resilience theme were more predominant than others. For example, the motivation to succeed, both extrinsic (the support systems from earlier in their lives and presently) and intrinsic (the internal fortitude that they have the tools to succeed), appeared to be the most prominent descriptors.

#### *3.1. Varying Definitions of Disrespect*

All participants in the study provided their own definitions of disrespect. Seven participants (29%) said that defining disrespect was difficult to articulate. That is, it is something that you know when it happens to you. One participant said it was actually harder than she thought it would be to define. Their definitions fell primarily into four main categories.

1. Not being listened to: which could be in the form of being ignored, not being heard, unwillingness to hear what you are saying (while making eye contact)

I would state my point and they would just look at me and then continue talking. I called it "invisible woman syndrome."


The organizations I've been a part of disrespect is something that most people feel that they are being respectful because they are being polite. But then you are left with disregard, which is not having an awareness for someone's presence, not being thoughtful about your word choice, not being curious about someone's perspective.

4. Condescension: assuming that, because you are a woman, you will take notes, order lunch, clean up after the meeting, while you are at the same level and sometimes at a higher level

Someone that violates, explicitly violates your values, your sense of well-being so that they can be seen or, in a manner that is oppressive, in a manner that is overbearing. I would say that would be disrespectful. Intentionally trying to undermine the person for their well-being, their betterment.


**Table 2.** Major Themes with Descriptors in Order of Significance to Research Question.
