
(© Halfpoint - stock.adobe.com)
A Team’s Gender Mix May Affect Who Feels Safe Owning Up to Mistakes
In A Nutshell
- Women on finance teams that were 75% or more male reported less comfort admitting mistakes than men on those teams, 5.46 versus 5.94 on a seven-point scale.
- Men’s comfort barely changed with team makeup, while women on heavily male teams also scored lowest on seeing mistakes as chances to learn.
- Once other factors were considered, women did not expect harsher penalties than men, pointing to feelings of safety rather than formal rules.
- Survey respondents were 1,485 UK finance workers, 81% of them women, and the results show associations only, not proof that male-heavy teams cause the gap.
Admitting a mistake at work can be awkward for anyone. For women on heavily male finance teams, it appears to be harder still. In a survey of UK finance professionals, women on teams that were 75% or more male rated their comfort with owning up to an error at 5.46 on a seven-point scale. Men on those same teams averaged 5.94. On teams with fewer men, women felt about as comfortable as their male colleagues, and sometimes more so.
Researchers at the London School of Economics asked 1,485 finance workers to consider a moderately serious slip, such as an error that forces coworkers to redo their work or a missed deadline, but nothing career-ending. Participants then rated how comfortable they would feel telling their company, whether they expected a penalty, and whether mistakes at their firm get treated as chances to learn. Results were published in Frontiers in Organizational Psychology.
Men’s comfort barely budged no matter how male-heavy their team was. Women’s views shifted more with the makeup of the team. A surprise came on punishment: once other factors were considered, women did not expect to be penalized more than men did. That hints the difference lies in how safe people feel, not in what the rulebook says.
Survey of 1,485 Finance Workers Was 81% Women
Women in Banking and Finance, a UK professional network, shared the online survey through its email lists and social media in September 2020, so the group that answered leaned heavily female: 1,205 women and 280 men. That matters because women hold fewer than half of UK finance jobs and well under 20 percent of senior roles. Results describe these respondents, not the whole industry. Jobs ranged from junior analyst to senior executive, and respondents averaged about 44 hours of work a week.
Participants rated three statements from one (not likely at all) to seven (very likely). One read, “I would feel comfortable telling my company about a mistake I made.” Another covered being penalized, and a third asked whether mistakes at their company count as learning opportunities. Respondents also reported what share of colleagues in their line of work were men, and about 44% worked in a heavily male setting, defined as 75% or more men. Researchers made sure differences in hours worked, job level, and area of finance, such as banking or insurance, were not driving the results.
Admitting Mistakes at Work Feels Harder for Women in Male-Heavy Finance Teams
Overall, men were a bit more upbeat about mistakes than women on all three measures. The bigger story emerged once researchers sorted people by team makeup. Men’s comfort sat at 5.81 on teams below the 75% mark, barely different from heavily male teams. Women’s averages slipped only slightly across team types, so the clearest signal was the widening distance between women and men, not a dramatic fall in women’s scores.
Seeing mistakes as chances to learn followed the same script. Women on heavily male teams scored lowest of any group on that question, at 4.20, compared with 4.62 for women on other teams. A possible reason, which the authors could not test, is that women who make up a sizable share of a team may feel freer to speak up and help build a safer culture.
No Clear Gender Gap in Expected Punishment for Mistakes
Oddly, one measure showed no clear gender gap after other factors were accounted for: how likely people thought they would be penalized. Women’s raw averages were a bit higher, but the difference vanished once job level and industry were considered, and it did not change with how male the workplace was.
Survey wording may explain the mismatch, according to the authors. “Penalized” probably brings official discipline to mind, which tends to follow standard rules for everyone. A woman’s worries may live somewhere less official, such as doubts about being seen as competent or having a mistake held against them in unwritten ways.
Stereotypes and Visibility May Explain Why Women in Finance Feel Less Safe
Why would a team’s gender mix matter? The study could not test reasons, but earlier research offers two. One is stereotype worry: a woman on a heavily male team may fear that a mistake will be read as proof of a negative belief about women. The other is being one of very few women, sometimes called tokenism, where every misstep gets noticed.
Cause and effect remain unproven, since women already uneasy about mistakes may drift toward, or stay on, male-heavy teams. Either way, the stakes are practical. Women who feel unsafe admitting errors might double-check excessively or steer clear of risky projects, the authors say, which could slow how fast they build experience. Companies can lose out as well when one group feels too uneasy to learn from errors.
To close the gap, the authors recommend that leaders, especially men on male-heavy teams, openly share their own mistakes. They also suggest mentorship networks where women can talk through setbacks safely, and performance reviews that reward smart risk-taking instead of punishing it.
Firms that want mistakes reported early have reason to check who actually feels able to speak up. On heavily male teams in this survey, women reported the lowest comfort of any group.
Disclaimer: This article reports on one peer-reviewed study and is meant for general information only. It is not professional, legal, or workplace advice, and the findings may not apply to every individual or workplace. Anyone with concerns about treatment at work should consult a qualified professional.
Paper Notes
Limitations
Respondents answered questions about a hypothetical mistake, and no one was observed making a real one, so self-reports may carry response bias. The survey is a one-time snapshot from September 2020, so it shows associations rather than causes, and the authors say the link could run both ways. The sample was not representative of the finance workforce. It was recruited through a women-in-finance network, which oversampled women (81%) and may have drawn men who are more engaged with diversity efforts. Response rate was roughly estimated at 25%, which the authors call only an approximation. The scenario fixed the severity of the hypothetical mistake but did not record its type, so the authors could not test whether the kind of error mattered. The survey also did not measure traits such as risk tolerance or rumination, so the study cannot say how much individual differences versus workplace culture drive the results. Workplace gender makeup was self-reported in 10-point ranges. Ten respondents who did not disclose a gender or identified as non-binary were excluded because the group was too small to analyze. Findings are specific to UK financial services. The authors point to a study of technology teams that reported similar patterns, but they call for more research in other fields.
Funding and Disclosures
Funding came from Women in Banking and Finance, the same network that helped develop and distribute the survey. The authors state that full academic freedom stayed with them and declared no commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a conflict of interest. They disclosed that generative AI was used in the last revisions to check references and proofread the text. The study received ethical approval from the LSE Research Ethics Committee (Ref #57255). The data are not posted publicly because of confidentiality agreements but can be shared on reasonable request.
Publication Details
Grace Lordan and Paris Will of the Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science at the London School of Economics and Political Science wrote the paper, titled “Is it ok to make mistakes at work? Perceptions of differential treatment of mistakes by men and women in the workplace.” It was published October 8, 2026, in Frontiers in Organizational Psychology, Volume 4, Article 1619562, after being received April 28, 2025, and accepted August 17, 2026. The editor was Lara Carminati of the University of Twente. DOI: 10.3389/forgp.2026.1619562. Citation: Lordan G and Will P (2026) Is it ok to make mistakes at work? Perceptions of differential treatment of mistakes by men and women in the workplace. Front. Organ. Psychol. 4:1619562. The article is open access under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).







