Abstract：
This paper stems from a desire to deepen our own understanding of why women might \'say no\' when allies and sponsors offer or create opportunities for advancement, leadership or recognition. The resulting disparity between representation by men and women in leadership positions, invited keynote speakers and publication counts in academic medicine is a stubborn and wicked problem that requires a synthesis of knowledge across multidisciplinary literature. Acknowledging the complexity of this topic, we selected a narrative critical review methodology to explore reasons why one man\'s opportunity might be a woman\'s burden in academic medicine.
We engaged with an iterative process of identifying, reviewing and interpreting literature from Psychology (cognitive, industrial and educational), Sociology, Health Professions Education and Business, placing no restrictions on context or year of publication. Knowledge synthesis and interpretation were guided by our combined expertise, lived experience, consultations with experts outside the author team and these guiding questions: (1) Why might women have less time for career advancement opportunities? (2) Why do women have less time for research and leadership? (3) How are these disparities maintained?
Turning down an opportunity may be a symptom of a much larger issue. The power of social expectations, culture and gender stereotypes remains a resistant force against calls for action. Consequently, women disproportionately take on other tasks that are not as well recognised. This disparity is maintained through social consequences for breaking with firmly entrenched stereotypes.
Popular strategies like \'lean into opportunities\', \'fake it till you make it\' and \'overcome your imposter syndrome\' suggest that women are standing in their own way. Critically, these axioms ignore powerful systemic barriers that shape these choices and opportunities. We offer strategies that allies, sponsors and peers can implement to offset the power of stereotypes.
We engaged with an iterative process of identifying, reviewing and interpreting literature from Psychology (cognitive, industrial and educational), Sociology, Health Professions Education and Business, placing no restrictions on context or year of publication. Knowledge synthesis and interpretation were guided by our combined expertise, lived experience, consultations with experts outside the author team and these guiding questions: (1) Why might women have less time for career advancement opportunities? (2) Why do women have less time for research and leadership? (3) How are these disparities maintained?
Turning down an opportunity may be a symptom of a much larger issue. The power of social expectations, culture and gender stereotypes remains a resistant force against calls for action. Consequently, women disproportionately take on other tasks that are not as well recognised. This disparity is maintained through social consequences for breaking with firmly entrenched stereotypes.
Popular strategies like \'lean into opportunities\', \'fake it till you make it\' and \'overcome your imposter syndrome\' suggest that women are standing in their own way. Critically, these axioms ignore powerful systemic barriers that shape these choices and opportunities. We offer strategies that allies, sponsors and peers can implement to offset the power of stereotypes.
摘要：
目标：这篇论文源于一种渴望加深我们自己的理解，即为什么当盟友和赞助者提供或创造晋升机会时，女性会“说不”。领导或认可。由此产生的男女在领导岗位上的代表性差异,学术医学中邀请的主题演讲者和出版物计数是一个顽固而邪恶的问题，需要跨多学科文献的知识综合。认识到这个主题的复杂性，我们选择了一个叙述性的批判性审查方法来探讨为什么一个男人的机会可能是一个女人在学术医学中的负担。
方法：我们参与了一个迭代过程，回顾和解读心理学文献(认知，工业和教育)，社会学,卫生职业教育和商业，对发布的背景或年份没有任何限制。知识综合和解释由我们的综合专业知识指导，生活经验，与作者团队以外的专家进行磋商，并提出以下指导性问题：（1）为什么女性获得职业发展机会的时间较少？（2）为什么女性进行研究和领导的时间较少？（3）这些差异如何维持？
结果：拒绝机会可能是更大问题的征兆。社会期望的力量，文化和性别陈规定型观念仍然是抵制行动呼吁的力量。因此,女性不成比例地承担其他没有得到认可的任务。这种差距是通过打破根深蒂固的陈规定型观念的社会后果来维持的。
结论：流行的策略，例如“倾向于机会”，\'伪造它直到你成功\'和\'克服你的冒名顶替综合症\'表明女人站在自己的方式。严重的,这些公理忽略了塑造这些选择和机会的强大的系统性障碍。我们提供的策略是盟友，赞助商和同行可以实施以抵消刻板印象的力量。
方法：我们参与了一个迭代过程，回顾和解读心理学文献(认知，工业和教育)，社会学,卫生职业教育和商业，对发布的背景或年份没有任何限制。知识综合和解释由我们的综合专业知识指导，生活经验，与作者团队以外的专家进行磋商，并提出以下指导性问题：（1）为什么女性获得职业发展机会的时间较少？（2）为什么女性进行研究和领导的时间较少？（3）这些差异如何维持？
结果：拒绝机会可能是更大问题的征兆。社会期望的力量，文化和性别陈规定型观念仍然是抵制行动呼吁的力量。因此,女性不成比例地承担其他没有得到认可的任务。这种差距是通过打破根深蒂固的陈规定型观念的社会后果来维持的。
结论：流行的策略，例如“倾向于机会”，\'伪造它直到你成功\'和\'克服你的冒名顶替综合症\'表明女人站在自己的方式。严重的,这些公理忽略了塑造这些选择和机会的强大的系统性障碍。我们提供的策略是盟友，赞助商和同行可以实施以抵消刻板印象的力量。
