The study was led by Dr Grace Lordan of the London School of Economics, who framed the central finding in striking terms. On paper, she noted, a mistake carries the same consequences regardless of who makes it, and that is exactly what the data showed. But formal rules, she argued, are not the same thing as culture. In teams that were three-quarters or more male, women reported feeling less comfortable admitting a mistake and less confident that it would be treated as something to learn from. Where women were in the majority, that gap vanished entirely. The finding points to a subtle but persistent mechanism: the psychological environment of a team can shape behavior in ways that formal policy neither predicts nor corrects.

The research design was straightforward but revealing. Participants were asked how comfortable they would be admitting mistakes at work, how likely they believed they would be penalized for making them, and whether they would consider mistakes to be learning opportunities. More than 1,400 employees in the UK financial service sector took part. Although the sector itself is heavily male dominated, the study population was composed of 81 percent women, giving the researchers a large sample of female respondents working across a wide range of team compositions. That variation in gender mix was the key analytical lever, allowing the team to compare how perceptions of error shifted as the share of male colleagues increased.

Two consistent patterns emerged from the data. First, being a woman was associated with viewing mistakes more negatively across the board. Second, working in a male-dominated setting was associated with more negative views of mistakes regardless of the respondent’s own gender. In other words, the environment itself appeared to darken everyone’s attitudes toward error, and women experienced that darkening most sharply. Lordan suggested that extremely male-heavy, high-pressure teams may foster a general climate of fear or perfectionism, along with an implicit norm that mistakes are simply not acceptable. Such norms, she noted, operate below the level of official policy, shaping what people feel safe to say and do.

The numerical contrasts were specific. Men reported more positive views of mistakes on every measurement than women, who felt less comfortable admitting errors, were more likely to think they would be punished for them, and were less inclined to see them as chances to learn. In teams where more than three quarters of members were men, women reported less comfort than men in the same settings, scoring 5.46 versus 5.94 on a seven-point scale. Women in those teams were also less likely to view mistakes as learning opportunities, scoring 4.20 versus 4.54. Yet in environments with a low share of men, women’s views were as positive as men’s, or slightly better. Men’s perceptions, by contrast, varied very little depending on the gender composition of their workplace, suggesting that the cultural burden of male-dominated settings falls asymmetrically on women.

One score, however, showed no gender difference at all: the expectation of penalization. In comparable roles and settings, women did not expect to be punished more than men, whether they worked in female-heavy or male-heavy environments. The researchers suggest this may reflect how respondents interpreted the term penalization, which likely evoked formal consequences such as a note on a personnel record or a concrete career setback. On those tangible, codified outcomes, women and men saw eye to eye. The divergence appeared instead in the informal dimensions of error culture, precisely where formal guarantees of equal treatment exert the least influence.

That distinction between formal and informal consequences may be the study’s most important contribution. Comfort with admitting mistakes and willingness to treat them as learning opportunities tap cultural currents rather than contractual terms, and it is there that bias tends to surface, Lordan explained. Women may fear being seen as less competent after an error, or worry that a mistake will be held against them in unwritten ways that never appear in an evaluation. Even with identical consequences on paper, women may feel they are standing on psychologically thinner ice. The result is a gap between what the rulebook promises and what employees actually experience, a gap that widens as the proportion of male colleagues grows.

The authors warn that the repercussions extend well beyond individual discomfort. Learning from failure is where innovation comes from, Lordan argued, and if women feel less free to admit mistakes, the organization does not merely lose their confidence; it loses the lessons those mistakes contain. Over time, she suggested, unequal freedom to fail could contribute to gaps in expertise, confidence and advancement, driven not by differences in ability but by unequal opportunity to learn. Employees who feel unable to acknowledge errors may compensate through excessive double-checking or by avoiding projects perceived as risky, behaviors that can quietly stunt career growth while depriving teams of candid post-mortems that improve collective performance.

The proposed remedies are, encouragingly, inexpensive. Leaders, and especially men leading male-heavy teams, can change the climate simply by being open about their own mistakes, modeling the admission of error as a normal and even valuable part of professional life. The authors also recommend peer groups for women, both inside and outside immediate teams, that offer safe spaces to discuss mistakes candidly. Such interventions target the informal layer of workplace culture directly, complementing formal anti-discrimination policies that, on their own, demonstrably fail to equalize how errors are experienced. An open and honest error culture, the researchers argue, is particularly vital in high-pressure work environments where the cost of concealed mistakes is highest.

The findings come with important caveats. Because of the gender-unbalanced sample, the authors caution that their results cannot be readily generalized to all workplaces. The conclusions apply most directly to high-pressure, low-tolerance fields such as finance, though other research suggests the pattern may extend to technology, engineering and some medical specialties. The data also relied on self-reports about a hypothetical scenario, which different participants may have imagined in different ways. Even so, the study adds rigorous quantitative evidence to a growing body of work showing that workplace culture, not just formal policy, shapes whose voices are heard and whose learning is enabled. A more inclusive error culture, the authors conclude, benefits everyone, and building it may begin with something as simple as a leader admitting a mistake out loud.

Subject of Research: Gender differences in perceptions of workplace mistakes and error culture in male-dominated teams

Article Title: Working around men may make women feel worse about mistakes, study finds

Article References: Working around men may make women feel worse about mistakes, study finds. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: error culture, workplace gender dynamics, organizational psychology, male-dominated teams, psychological safety, learning from failure, financial services, women at work, team composition, leadership, Frontiers in Organizational Psychology, survey research

Professor Hongbin Cai, Dean of HKU Business School and Chair of Economics, framed the launch as the continuation of a strategy that began nearly a decade ago. In his welcome remarks, he noted that the school has been nurturing future wealth management professionals since 2017, and that wealth management has become increasingly important in economic development as Hong Kong leverages its unique position connecting the Chinese Mainland with the rest of the world. He added that the sector will be of even greater significance in Hong Kong’s upcoming Five-Year Plan, signalling that the government’s own planning documents are expected to elevate the industry’s role in the city’s economic future.

The dean was candid about the environment in which the Academy will operate. Hong Kong, he said, is navigating an era filled with uncertainties, shaped by rapid changes in the global landscape and the fast-paced evolution of artificial intelligence. His argument was that the city must respond to these challenges by continuously strengthening its overall competitiveness, and that the Academy is designed as part of that response. By providing an international platform that brings together government, industry, academia and research, the institution aims to act as a key driver of the wealth management ecosystem, contributing through three channels that the school identifies as thought leadership, talent development and industry engagement.

The timing of the launch was a central theme of the ceremony. Christopher Hui, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, delivered the keynote address and told the audience that the Academy’s establishment comes at a pivotal moment as the industry enters a new chapter. He described the idea of connecting the dots as both a fitting ambition for the Academy and a timely one for Hong Kong’s current development needs. In his telling, the city having emerged as the world’s largest cross-boundary wealth management centre immediately raises a follow-up question: what kind of leadership does that top position actually represent? It is a framing that shifts the conversation from raw market size to the quality of the professional ecosystem that sustains it.

Hui also used the address to outline the policy work under way in government. He said continuous policy enhancements include refining the preferential tax regimes for funds, single family offices and carried interest, broadening the range of qualifying investments to cover private credit, digital assets and precious metals, and strengthening connectivity with Chinese Mainland markets. Notably, he argued that the growth of the wealth management sector should reach beyond the assets it manages, extending into skilled careers, investment in enterprises and support for communities. That wider definition of success matters for a university-led academy, because it positions education not merely as a pipeline for asset managers but as a contributor to the sector’s broader social and economic footprint.

The ceremony also featured a panel discussion under the theme of what comes next for Hong Kong after reaching number one. Three speakers took part: Joseph Chan, Under Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury; Aveline San, Chief Executive Officer and Banking Head of Citi Hong Kong, Chair of Citibank (China) and Convenor of the Financial Services Development Council’s Human Capital Committee; and Lok Yim, Regional Head of HSBC Private Bank, Asia Pacific. The discussion was moderated by Professor Anna Wong, Director of the HKU Business School Wealth Management Academy, whose own appointment to lead the new institution reflects the school’s decision to place an academic at the centre of its industry-facing agenda.

Chan laid out three priorities for consolidating Hong Kong’s position as the leading international wealth management centre. The first is to proactively reach out to more jurisdictions to showcase the city’s unique advantages. The second is to continuously enhance policy in line with market development trends such as fintech and green finance so that competitiveness is maintained as the industry evolves. The third is to strengthen connections with the global financial sector and with different markets. Taken together, the three points sketch a strategy in which regulatory agility and international outreach reinforce each other, with Hong Kong competing on both product breadth and access rather than on any single advantage.

On the question of people, Chan offered a measured view of the sector’s most pressing constraint. He acknowledged that a talent shortage is a possible bottleneck for the industry, but argued that it also reflects the sector’s rapid growth rather than decline. Alongside government training initiatives, he said, the education sector can play a key role in helping young talent upskill and gain industry exposure through internship programmes that meet the sector’s evolving demands. That is precisely the territory the new Academy intends to occupy, and its programme of activities suggests a deliberately practical orientation rather than a purely academic one.

The Academy builds on an existing educational foundation. In 2017, HKU Business School launched the Bachelor of Finance in Asset Management and Private Banking, the first undergraduate programme of its kind in Asia, followed by the Master of Family Wealth Management and the Master of Wealth Management programmes. With the Academy now in place, the school’s activities, supported by Bank of China (Hong Kong), will include directing students toward internship opportunities, organising salons, forums and a wealth management challenge, and offering scholarship programmes. The institution also plans to facilitate engagement between students and industry professionals through talks and other activities designed to foster collaboration between industry and academia and to enable knowledge exchange. An advisory committee comprising industry representatives and scholars specialising in finance, investment and wealth management will advise on the development of the Academy’s programmes and its strategic direction.

For HKU Business School itself, the launch adds a specialised institution to a portfolio that has been climbing the research rankings. Established in 2001, the school is ranked number one in Asia and number six globally in the 2025 UTD Business School Research Rankings, and number one in Asia and number eleven globally in the 2026 Financial Times Research Ranking. It holds accreditation from both EQUIS and AACSB and operates an international network extending to Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Ho Chi Minh City. The significance of the new Academy, however, may lie less in rankings than in the model it represents: a formal, funded bridge between a government that is rewriting tax and investment rules, a financial industry that is short of skilled people, and a university that has been building wealth management curricula since 2017. If Hong Kong is to translate its newly won number-one status into durable leadership, the Academy’s founders are betting that the decisive variable will be talent, and that the university is the place to produce it.

Subject of Research: University-led wealth management education and talent development in Hong Kong

Article Title: HKU Business School launches the first wealth management academy nurturing future leaders and strengthening Hong Kong’s global leadership

Article References: HKU Business School launches the first wealth management academy nurturing future leaders and strengthening Hong Kong’s global leadership. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: HKU Business School, wealth management, Hong Kong, Bank of China, financial services, talent development, private banking, asset management, family offices, fintech, green finance, financial services policy