The top four "problems" that stall women in the workplace:

Their need to be liked and consequent tendency to take things personally.

Their awareness of other people's needs and feelings (in a culture which places little value on such considerations) and consequent impulse to placate and to be unspecific about what they want.

Their intolerance of the (male) "strategy of bullshitting"; but not knowing how to do things differently (because they're relative newcomers), they confuse assertiveness with aggressiveness.

A sense of isolation when difficulties arise.

Is this another crack at blameless, hard-working men? Is this another rabble-rousing harridan who doesn't know that feminism is so-o-o 1970s and that women who can't make it are too soft, too ugly or just bovine (the baby effect)?

Another blast of aggression from that mouthy gender which already rules the world by stealth and proxy anyway?

Perhaps you think that. Plenty of people do, some within hissing distance of this page. Some might even plant the blame on Anne Dickson, a pioneer of assertiveness training and perhaps the culprit in the damn secretary's dead-eyed refusal to buy the wife's birthday present or in the flashing of two fingers by that murderous bimbo on the Lucan by-pass.

Anne Dickson, however, has a few messages in her new book which may be a tad disconcerting. For both genders.

For one thing, her brand of assertiveness was never about loud-mouthed aggressiveness, blank refusals, two-finger gestures or always being the winner: it is about being able to speak up for yourself, while leaving the door open for the other person. It's about balance, not winning.

Meanwhile, she says that far from appreciating and trying to learn from the new thinking that sees traditional womanly skills - relating to others, teamwork, communication - as the bases for sound business practice, many men have chosen to fight it. So we have the hot corporate trend towards assertiveness-training for men, but the assertiveness is of a type which, in Dickson's view, is based on envy, competition and fear of being toppled from power.

This, she calls `two-fold harassment - "resentment at women's presence in the workplace combined with a refusal to reward women for the very qualities they bring, because of envy. . ." Which is bad news for women, but makes no commercial sense either.

For instead of capitalising on the fact that women need no expensive training in these "new" workplace skills, companies are paying good money to instil a distorted version in men whose motivation is to remain the dominant gender.

And consider this: part of the reason women are not putting themselves forward for senior positions is because they abhor a culture that perpetuates the "strategy of bullshitting" (and, many women would add, its first cousin, "willy-waving", meaning outbursts of authoritarian guff shorn of reason). Bullshitting, for anyone lucky enough to need a definition, means appearing always to know what you're talking about, especially when you don't. Or, as an Army friend is wont to say: "When in doubt, advance with confidence".

"I do think of it as a male thing," says Dickson. "It's so much a part of the game. It's like football, a competition. It's something that has gone on for so long that nobody ever questions it because the whole structure depends on it."

Gloomy, eh? And you think it can only get better? "I am not optimistic about a change from envy to appreciation because fear of change is likely to continue to rule," says Dickson.

"Only when fear is acknowledged can aggression be diminished. The way forward is not in marginalising women but by acknowledging that there is something to learn. That takes humility. But remember that humility and bullshitting are absolutely at opposite ends of the spectrum . . ."

You might not like what she has to say, but Anne Dickson cannot be lightly dismissed. She has been training men and women for more than 25 years in the UK, Europe and South Africa. Her first book, A Woman in Your Own Right, published in 1982, still sells 20,000 copies a year. Cynics might suggest she has a vested interest in perpetuating the old stereotypes but rather, her views are underpinned by listening, witnessing and experience.

"A while ago, a male colleague and I were very keen to offer a course for men and women working together: how to co-operate in a new working atmosphere of the future; how to work from a position of co-operation and mutual understanding instead of opposition and mistrust. Four times in two years we offered this course: four times the only subscribers were women. We could only conclude that fear among men was too deeply established, leaving little faith in collaboration."

She recounted her conversation that morning with a 31-year-old friend of hers who had just come from her second interview with a London estate agency: "What really surprised her was the attitude of the manager of this big, old London firm. He was saying things like: `I'm sure you'll be fine, certainly at selling mortgages. You'll be able to chat them up' - the whole implication being that if she actually concluded any deals, it would be because she was attractive, not because she could actually be good at her job."

Oh, come on, Anne, the place is coming down with women negotiators. "Maybe," she replies, "but how many women are actually at the top of your organisation?"

It is her firm contention that although much has changed on paper in 20 years, little has changed in practice. Take the US. Although three-quarters of Americans say they are ready to elect a woman president, the votes go to a man one would hesitate to put in change of a Tupperware party, says commentator Mary Riddell.

In the UK, despite the Babel of commentary around the election of 101 women to the Commons, "the perception", says Riddell, "is that men engineer the big social changes while women get to do anorexia summitry and exhort the nation to eat up its spinach."

Those words could equally have come from Dixon. "When I'm starting a course, I keep finding all these women who are so highly qualified, trailing titles and qualifications and here I am working with them. And they cannot speak up, they don't know how to deal with somebody when they're put down, they don't challenge unfair criticism. And the reason is not that they're wimps, not that they're inadequate, not that they're unqualified but that they are very confused. And part of the reason they are confused is because you're got this huge gap between this commitment to equal opportunities that we all see on paper and what we know to be the reality. Any gap between what we see and what we're told will drive people mad in every sense.

"Opportunity 2000 was a Tory political initiative introduced with trumpets blaring to get more women into senior management by the year 2000. But they had to admit they had absolutely failed. And what they say - and they say this over and over again - is `well, it's women's fault because women don't put themselves forward'. Well, would you put yourself forward?"

Certainly, more women are reaching lower and middle management, she concedes. "I know, I work with them, but I also know what they're up against. It's almost as if the pressure is increasing precisely because things are changing. I see women on the courses feeling inadequate, with a really poor self-image, believing they cannot cope - and then they suddenly realise `it's not just me, there are a lot of women out there just like me'. Once you take away all the pretence, you realise what you're up against. And that's a really significant moment of awareness because you learn that it's not just because you're Mary or Amanda or Martha; it's partly because you're a woman at work."

It is nonsense, she says, to suggest the experience of work is exactly the same whether you are male or female. Women at all levels are newcomers to a system entrenched in male-dominated values; they have no established tradition behind them. Those who can, swallow their values and become as "good" as the men; those who can't, walk, or remain at the lower levels.

Dickson's book, as these books often do, seems to state the obvious. Yet, it bears careful scrutiny. It shows how often one has to settle for respect rather than being liked: that assertiveness is not the same as "aggression in velvet gloves"; that aggression (unlike anger) is a learnt, not a natural, response; that to show anxiety, vulnerability, sympathy or consideration is human, even valuable.

Women at Work: Strategies for Survival and Success, by Anne Dickson is published by Kogan Page, price £8.99 in UK