This is the eleventh in a series of blog posts looking at Sheryl Sandberg's new book, Lean In - Women, Work, and The Will to Lead. Last week we looked at the ninth chapter of Sandberg’s book, The Myth of Doing it All.
Over the last few weeks I’ve shared what I’ve learned from each chapter of Sandberg's book, which I believe is rich with stories and research that can help any woman. Much of the research is U.S. based, but as we know research done in the U.S. can also be applicable here in Canada.
This week, Let’s Start Talking About It.
Sandberg treads into the f-word territory - feminism. Sandberg, like many women, believed in her early college years that feminists of the sixties and seventies had done all the heavy lifting and had achieved gender equality for her generation. She quickly corrected anyone who identified her as a feminist.
As Sandberg progressed in her career, she quickly became aware of sexism in the workplace and women’s struggle to fit in. She actually tried smoking a cigar once with her colleagues in an attempt to be one of the guys. Little by little she watched as women left the workplace because they weren’t ‘fitting in.’ Despite the caution given to her, she decided to wade into deep and muddy waters in order to talk about gender in the workplace. According to Sandberg, “Shutting down discussion is self-defeating and impedes progress. We need to talk and listen and debate and refute and instruct and learn and evolve.” When actively engaging and openly talking about these issues people can change their behaviours.
Sandberg gives an example of a doctor, who while doing rounds would ask questions and wait for hands to be raised to provide the answers. He stopped asking for hands to be raised and instead started asking direct questions equally of male and female interns. What he found was that the women knew as much and sometimes even more than their male colleagues, but just didn’t raise their hands. Sandberg also talks about a CEO who starting pointing out when women were interrupted in a meeting bringing awareness to an issue that drives most women crazy.
Sandberg makes the point that “Men at the top are often unaware of the benefits they enjoy simply because they are men, and this can make them blind to the disadvantages associated with being a woman.” Starting the conversation helps to build awareness of some of the barriers in the workplace women face and helps men, like our doctor and CEO above, to change behaviours ensuring the workplace is more equitable.
“A 2012 study found that when evaluating identical resumes for a lab manager from a male student and female student, scientists of both sexes gave better marks to the male applicant. Even though the students had the same qualifications and experience, the scientists deemed the female student less competent and offered her a lower starting salary and less mentoring.” This is just one example to show how gender bias influences how we view performance by typically raising our assessment of men while lowering our assessment of women.
Another issue Sandberg raises is research that shows that “when men and women select a colleague to collaborate with, both were significantly more likely to choose someone of the same gender,” even though diverse groups are proven to provide better results. I would add that this same practice is used in the selection in hiring and advancement as well.
The simple recognition of the stereotypical biases that women place on themselves, on other women and that men place on women can help to bring cultural changes to a more equal workplace - we simply have to talk about them.
Sandberg finishes off this chapter saying that she now proudly calls herself a feminist. When women are offered a more specific definition of feminism - “A feminist is someone who believes in social, political, and economic equality of the sexes” - the percentage of women who agree rises almost threefold.
Like Sandberg, I am proud to call myself a feminist. I too corrected people who branded me with this title early on in my career, thinking that feminists were all bra-burning radicals, chanting about equality. I now appreciate these women and the hard-fought battle they endured to make sure that my generation and those that follow would experience better equality. There is much left to do, the beginning of this conversation is definitely a step in the right direction.
This is the tenth in a series of blog posts looking at Sheryl Sandberg's new book, Lean In - Women, Work, and The Will to Lead. Last week we looked at the eighth chapter of Sandberg’s book, Do you have a real partner?
Over the past few weeks I have shared what I’ve learned from each chapter of Sandberg's book, which I believe is rich with stories and research that can help any woman. Much of the research is U.S. based, but as we know research done in the U.S. can also be applicable here in Canada.
This week, The Myth of Doing it All.
“Having it all” - we hear people talk about it, but is it really possible? Sandberg says no. She also suggests we can’t ‘do it all’ and the desire for ‘having it all’ and ‘doing it all’ are just large myths for most, if not all, working women. Sandberg talks about how women compare their performance at work to men (who have not taken on as many of the household duties) while at the same time, comparing themselves with stay-at-home moms. It is through comparisons to these men and women that we continually beat ourselves up for not measuring up to either.
Sandberg quotes Dr. Laurie Glimcher, dean of Weill Cornell Medical College: “the key for her in pursuing her career while raising children was learning where to focus her attention. I had to decide what mattered and what didn’t and I learned to be a perfectionist in only the things that mattered.”
A poster at Facebook reads, ‘Done is better than perfect.’ Sandberg suggests we should try to embrace this motto and let go of unattainable standards. “Aiming for perfection causes frustration at best and paralysis at worst.”
Research quoted in Lean In states that in 2009, married middle-income parents worked about eight and a half hours more per week than in 1979, suggesting that technology (being connected 24/7) has a large role to play in our extended, if never-ending, workday. Sandberg states, “there is a new normal for home too. Just as expectations for how many hours people will work have risen dramatically, so have expectations for how many hours mothers will spend focused on their children. In 1975, stay-at-home mothers spent an average of about 11 hours per week on primary child care (defined as routine care giving and activities that foster a child’s well-being, such as reading and fully focused play.) Mothers employed outside the home in 1975 spent 6 hours doing these activities. Today, stay-at-home mothers spend about 17 hours per week on primary child care, on average, while mothers who work outside the home spend about 11 hours. This means that an employed mother today spends about the same amount of time on primary child care activities as an unemployed mother did in 1975.”
Sandberg quotes another piece of research started in 1991 by the Early Child Care Research Network. Through extensive study, the research found: “children who were cared for exclusively by their mothers did not develop differently than those who were also cared for by others…Parental behavioural factors - including fathers who are responsive and positive, mothers who favour ‘self-directed child behaviour’ and parents with emotional intimacy in their marriages - influence a children’s development two to three times more than any form of child care.”
Sandberg closes the chapter: “The right question is not ‘Can I do it all?’ but ‘Can I do what’s most important for me and my family?’ So get off the guilt trip and the urge to be a perfectionist in all things. Decide what matters the most and concentrate on that. So what if your closets look like a bomb went off? No one should be opening the door to your closet anyway. Taking the advice of Sandberg and the many others in this chapter will make you more productive at work and happier at home. Who could ask for anything more?
This is the ninth in a series of blog posts looking at Sheryl Sandberg's new book, Lean In - Women, Work, and The Will to Lead. Last week we looked at the seventh chapter of Sandberg’s book, Don’t Leave Before You Leave. (Over the next few weeks I will share what I’ve learned from each chapter of Sandberg's book, which I believe is rich with stories and research that can help any woman. Much of the research is U.S. based, but as we know research done in the U.S. can also be applicable here in Canada.
This week, Make Your Partner a Real Partner.
Early on in this chapter Sandberg reminds us that, “In the last thirty years, women have made more progress in the workforce than in the home. According to the most recent analysis, when a husband and wife both are employed full-time, the mother does 40 percent more child care and about 30 percent more housework than the father. A 2009 survey found that only 9 percent of people in dual-earner marriages said that they shared housework, child care, and breadwinning evenly.”
Sandberg cautions that if you want to be successful in the workforce you must share your home life evenly. It is not as simple as men needing to be more empowered to do more at home. Sandberg argues that women must be willing to give up some of these duties to their partners to make it work. Mothers must resist the temptation to be the gatekeeper in that she impedes the father’s involvement. Sandberg suggests to get dad involved from the get go and not to be overly critical of the way he does things. In time he will figure it out. Sandberg quotes more research, “a study found that wives who engage in gatekeeping behaviours do five more hours of family work per week than wives who take a more collaborative approach.” Who couldn’t use five extra hours a week!
Sandberg suggests that the “single most important career decision that a woman makes is whether she will have a life partner and who that partner is.” She goes on to say, “I don’t know of one woman in a leadership position whose life partner is not fully - and I mean fully - supportive of her career. And contrary to the popular notion that only unmarried women can make it to the top, the majority of the most successful female business leaders have partners. Of the twenty-eight women who have served as CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, twenty-six were married, one was divorced, and only one had never been married.”
On the flip side, Sandberg quotes more research saying that, “In a 2007 study of well-educated professional women who had left the paid workforce, 60 percent cited their husbands as a critical factor in their decision. The women specifically listed their husband’s lack of participation in child care and other domestic tasks and the expectation that wives should be the ones to cut back on employment as reasons for quitting.”
Sandberg’s advice is simple, “date them all: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner.”
Are you fortunate enough to have an equal partner? Do you even want one or are you happy to take the lions’ share of the household chores? Perhaps it is too large a leap for those of us who were raised to believe women ran the household to want to give up household tasks. An interesting exercise may be to list what both partners do and assess if the list is even.
Sandberg ends the chapter by saying, “We need more men to sit at the table…the kitchen table.”
This is the eighth in a series of blog posts looking at Sheryl Sandberg's new book, Lean In - Women, Work, and The Will to Lead. Last week we looked at the sixth chapter of Sandberg’s book, Seek and Speak Your Truth.
Over the next few weeks I will share what I’ve learned from each chapter of Sandberg's book, which I believe is rich with stories and research that can help any woman. Much of the research is U.S. based, but as we know research done in the U.S. can also be applicable here in Canada.
This week, Don’t Leave Before You Leave.
In this chapter Sandberg addresses the idea of leaning back in your career years before you actually have a child. She provides an example of woman who before she even had a boyfriend, let alone a partner whom she was contemplating having a child with, came to talk to her about work-life balance with kids. Sandberg states, “Often without even realizing it, the woman stops reaching for new opportunities,” all because she is contemplating having a child at some point in the future. “By not finding ways to stretch herself in the years leading up to motherhood, she has fallen behind,” says Sandberg. Her point being, that by ‘leaning back’ too early in a woman’s career to prepare for motherhood, we limit our opportunities and career advancement. Further, by the time we do have a child we are in a job that is less compelling, challenging and rewarding, making it easier to choose to exit the workplace. “So the irony - and, to me, the tragedy - is that women wind up leaving the workforce precisely because of the thing they did to stay in the workforce,” says Sandberg. Women have leaned back too early, missed out on career opportunities and left because they felt little satisfaction in their career.
Sandberg has received a lot of criticism for her message to Lean In with people saying she suggests working to the top of an organization is the only option for women. Personally, I think that criticism is unwarranted because of her statements in this chapter. “There are many powerful reasons to exit the workforce. Being a stay-at-home parent is wonderful, and often a necessary choice for many people. No one should pass judgement on these highly personal decisions.” Her point is that everyone has to do what is right for them personally whether that be to become a career-loving parent or a stay-at-home parent.
This statement from Sandberg sums it all up nicely, “What I am arguing is that the time to scale back is when a break is needed or when a child arrives - not before, and certainly not years in advance.” She proposes that you go full tilt until baby arrives and then make your decisions from that position. Women may make different decisions about career and family if they were in a career that was rewarding, simulating, challenging, satisfying and perhaps even more flexible.
Sandberg goes on to provide data on highly educated women leaving the workforce and makes the link to this being a major contributor to the leadership gender gap. She also provides data on the connection between how long women are out of the workforce and the decrease in what compensation they can expect. “Controlling for education and hours worked, women’s average annual earnings decease by 20 per cent if they are out of the workforce for just one year. Average annual earnings decline by 30 per cent after two or three years. If society truly valued the work of caring for children, companies and institutions would find ways to reduce these steep penalties and help parents combine career and family responsibilities.”
“One miscalculation that some women make is to drop out early in their careers because their salary barely covers the cost of child care. Child care is a huge expense, and it’s frustrating to work hard just to break even. But professional women need to measure the cost of child care against their future salary rather than their current salary.”
Sandberg closes out the chapter stating, “Anyone lucky enough to have options should keep them open. Don’t enter the workforce already looking for the exit. Don’t put on the brakes. Accelerate. Keep a foot on the gas pedal until a decision must be made. That’s the only way to ensure that when that day comes, there will be a real decision to make.”
There is a lot of great information for women to consider as they make these personal decisions about career and family. I give Sandberg credit for raising the questions any one should consider when contemplating parenthood.
This is the seventh in a series of blog posts looking at Sheryl Sandberg's new book, Lean In - Women, Work, and The Will to Lead. Last week we looked at the fifth chapter of Sandberg’s book, Are You My Mentor?
Over the next few weeks I’m going to share what I’ve learned from each chapter of Sandberg's book, which I believe is rich with stories and research that can help any woman. Much of the research is U.S. based, but as we know research done in the U.S. is equally applicable here in Canada.
This week, Seek and Speak Your Truth.
In this chapter Sandberg takes a look at authentic communication and says, “it is not always easy, but it is the basis for successful relationships at home and real effectiveness at work.” Sandberg looks at how hierarchy can make being honest in the workplace difficult and explains why for many women, speaking honestly in a professional environment carries an additional set of fears: Fear of not being considered a team player. Fear of seeming negative or nagging. Fear that constructive criticism will come across as just plain old criticism. Fear that by speaking up, we will call attention to ourselves, which might open us up to attack (a fear brought to us by the same voice in the back of our heads that urges us not to sit at the table.)” Sandberg goes on to offer this advice, “When we recognize that we can see things only from our own perspective, we can share our views in a nonthreatening way. Statements of opinion are always more constructive in the first person “I” form. She offers the following comparison, “You never take my suggestions seriously” and “I feel frustrated that you have not responded to my last four e-mails, which leads me to believe that my suggestions are not that important to you. Is that so?” The former can elicit a quick and defensive “That’s not true!” The latter is much harder to deny. One triggers a disagreement: the other sparks a discussion.” An interesting perspective to honest and authentic communication.
Sandberg also covers the importance of asking for feedback in this chapter and right up front identifies that receiving feedback is not always a comfortable thing. Sandberg states, ““How can I do better?” “What am I doing that I don’t know?” “ What am I not doing that I don’t see?” These questions can lead to many benefits. And believe me, the truth hurts. Even when I have solicited feedback, any judgment can feel harsh. But the upside of painful knowledge is so much greater than the downside of blissful ignorance.”
Sandberg also covers the dreaded tears at work and openly admits it has happened to her on more than one occasion. Instead of telling women they should never cry at work, which for some of us is almost impossible, she puts emotion into context. “Sharing emotions builds better relationships. Motivation comes from working on things we care about. It also comes from working with people we care about. To really care about others, we have to understand them - what they like and dislike, what they feel as well as think. Emotion drives both men and women and influences every decision we make. Recognizing the role emotions play and being willing to discuss them makes us better managers, partners and peers.” She goes on to quote research that found “true leadership stems from individuality that is honestly and sometimes imperfectly expressed.” Perhaps taking this approach with your boss the next time you break down at work will help him/her better understand the value of expressed emotion.
Sandberg finishes off the chapter with this, “Maybe someday shedding tears in the workplace will no longer be viewed as embarrassing or weak, but as a simple display of authentic emotion. And maybe the compassion and sensitivity that have historically held some women back will make them more natural leaders in the future.”
This is the sixth in a series of blog posts looking at Sheryl Sandberg's new book, Lean In - Women, Work, and The Will to Lead. Last week we looked at the fourth chapter of Sandberg’s book, Careers Are a Jungle Gym, Not a Ladder.
Over the next few weeks I’m going to share what I’ve learned from each chapter of Sandberg's book, which I believe is rich with stories and research that can help any woman. Much of the research is U.S. based, but as we know research done in the U.S. is equally applicable here in Canada.
This week, Are You My Mentor?
Sandberg comes up with one of the shortest, but most powerful, definition of both a mentor and sponsor in her book - Mentors (people who will advise them) and Sponsors (people who will use their influence to advocate for them.)
Research shows that the later is what is needed for women to move up from middle management to senior management. Sandberg states that, “Both men and women with sponsors are more likely to ask for stretch assignments and pay raises that their peers of the same gender without sponsors.” Of course mentorship still has its place in the workplace. Sandberg cautions not to go around asking strangers ‘if they will be your mentor,’ but rather be respectful of someone’s time and ask crisp and focused questions. These questions should be how to manage business and not focused on questions around managing your career. She suggests that we are sending the wrong message to young women, “Get a mentor and you will excel.” Instead, we need to tell them, “Excel and you will get a mentor.”
Sandberg addresses the issue of cross-gender mentoring - as in a senior man mentoring a junior woman - and the perception of that relationship. She quotes a study from the Harvard Business Review that reports 64 percent of men at the level of vice-president and above being hesitant to have a one-on-one meeting with a more junior woman. For their part, half of the junior women avoided close contact with senior men. Sandberg states, “this evasiveness must end. Personal connections lead to assignments and promotions, so it needs to be okay for men and women to spend informal time together the same way men can. A senior man and junior woman at a bar can be mentoring…but it looks like dating. This interpretation holds women back and creates a double bind. If women try to cultivate a close relationship with a male sponsor, they risk being the target of workplace gossip. If women try to get to the top without a sponsor’s help, their careers will often stall.” Sandberg goes on to describe a colleague’s solution to this problem - he created a breakfast and lunch only policy for everyone, both men and women, so he was equally accessible to both genders but wasn’t being asked to go out to dinner or drinks after work hours, which might be misinterpreted by others.
One study Sandberg quotes shows that women who found mentors through formal programs where 50 percent more likely to be promoted than women who found mentors on their own. She goes on to say that the most effective formal programs help educate men about the need to mentor women and establish guidelines for appropriate behaviour, helping to normalize the senior man/junior woman model.
Sandberg also touches on the peer-to-peer mentorship and how valuable it can be to be provided more current and useful counsel.
If you don’t have a mentor or a sponsor you might want to think a little differently on how to obtain one. Instead of asking, “Will you be my mentor?” come up with a dynamic and thoughtful question to get a conversation going. Be gracious about accepting the advice or counsel provided in the answer and be respectful of time. You may just spark an interest in the heart of the person you are asking questions of and she or he may extend the mentor/sponsor invitation.
This is the fifth in a series of blog posts looking at Sheryl Sandberg's new book, Lean In - Women, Work, and The Will to Lead. Last week we looked at the third chapter of Sandberg’s book, Success and Likeability.
Over the next few weeks I’m going to share what I’ve learned from each chapter of Sandberg's book, which I believe is rich with stories and research that can help any woman. Much of the research is U.S. based, but as we know research done in the U.S. is equally applicable here in Canada.
This week, It’s A Jungle Gym, Not a Ladder.
In her book Sandberg states, “The most common metaphor for careers is a ladder, but this concept no longer applies to most workers. As of 2010, the average American had 11 jobs from the ages of 18 to 46 alone. This means that the days of joining an organization or corporation and staying there to climb one ladder are long gone. “
She goes on to quote Lori Goler, who is also an executive at Facebook, “ladders are limiting - people can move up or down, on or off. Jungle gyms offer more creative exploration. There’s only one way to get to the top of a ladder, but there are many ways to get to the top of a jungle gym.”
I have talked a number of times on this blog about the importance of taking stretch assignments and moving sideways in your career. Most successful women that I’ve talked to did not get to their position by making a plan and sticking to it. They looked for opportunities and moved to broaden their skill base before moving up the ladder. Many women I know in senior positions would have never dreamt of ending up where they are now, when they started out in their careers after graduation.
Sandberg points out that when she graduated from college Mark Zuckerberg was only seven years old. Facebook hadn’t even been thought of at the time so it would have been impossible to connect the dots from graduation to her current COO position. With the pace of change driven by technology most of us don’t even know what career paths will be available in the next ten years. Sandberg suggests that you have a long-term dream with an 18-month plan. She also provides career advice given to her by a colleague - always look for potential for growth when making career decisions.
Sandberg’s 18-month plan is twofold: first, she looks at targets that her team can accomplish and second, a more personal goal to learn a new skill by asking herself, “How can I improve?” Sandberg cautions about missing out on opportunities by focussing too much on career advancement. It is important to take risks in your career. She cautions that being risk adverse can lead to stagnation. Many factors stop women from taking risks in business. They can range from the stereotypical barriers that we place on ourselves, to external barriers that are placed on us, to accommodating a spouse’s career.
Sandberg states, “One reason women avoid stretch assignments and new challenges is that they worry too much about whether they currently have the skills they need for a new role. This can become a self-fulfilling prophecy, since so many abilities are acquired on the job. An internal report at Hewlett-Packard revealed that women only apply for open jobs if they think they meet 100 percent of the criteria listed. Men apply if they meet 60 percent of the requirements. This difference has a huge ripple effect. Women need to shift from thinking “I’m not ready to do that” to thinking “I want to do that - and I’ll learn by doing it.”
Ask yourself if you have ever given up an opportunity for any of the reasons listed above. Did you not move sideways because you only wanted to go upward? Do you have a long-term dream and an 18-month plan? Do you look for areas of personal improvement? Do you look for opportunities for stretch assignments or high-profile projects? Have you not applied for that dream job because you don’t feel you are 100 percent ready for the task at hand?
Gaining awareness of behaviours that hold you back will help change your thinking and set you up for success.
Of course not! Even if you were a female born today you won’t live long enough to celebrate the close of the gender gap. That is exactly how long a new study from the Canadian Centre of Policy Alternatives said it would take to close the gender gap when it comes to economic and political opportunities, which policy changes. 228 years. How can that be?
The study took the rate of increase of women in politics and on corporate boards at 2.3 per cent in the past two decades and determined that if the rate of change remained the same it would indeed take 228 years for equality to take hold.
In politics alone, the gender gap in Parliament has hardly moved at all in 20 years, with women accounting for just under 25 per cent of federal and provincial politicians. Closing that gap will take 390 years at this rate, the study says.
The picture is a bit brighter when looking at women’s wages and promotions to senior management. Closing the gap in this area will only take 70 years, the study found. At least my grandchildren might see that gap close.
So what do we do? Women now account for more than half of the undergraduates in Canada. They are almost 50% of the Canadian workplace. What is holding them out of economic and political landscapes? The study suggests the following actions:
1. An increase in women’s representation in formal politics.
2. Adequate, consistent funding to civil society organizations.
The study concludes with the following statement:
“Canada has one of the highest level of well-being in the world. But the distribution of that well-being is not equal. Measures like the gender gap give us a picture of the difference that gender inequality makes for Canadians. Our greatest gap could be closed with an investment of political and financial resources into both the civil society organizations and political institutions that represent the needs and interests of women in Canada. This is an investment that will pay huge dividends, not only to the quality of life of Canadians but also in the economic stability of the country. Public policy that closes the economic gap could increase Canada’s GDP by as much at 10%. An end to spousal violence and sexual assault will provide security for over a million Canadians each year and save the economy more than $7 billion a year. Canada cannot afford to wait 228 years to realize these benefits.”
Let’s hope the Canadian and provincial governments read and act on this report! 228 years is much too long to wait.
This is the fourth in a series of blog posts looking at Sheryl Sandberg's new book, Lean In - Women, Work, and The Will to Lead. Last week we looked at the second chapter of Sandberg’s book, Sit at the Table.
Over the next few weeks I’m going to share what I’ve learned from each chapter of Sandberg's book, which I believe is rich with stories and research that can help any woman. Much of the research is U.S. based, but as we know research done in the U.S. is equally applicable here in Canada.
This week, Success and Likeability.
This chapter offers up one of the most enlightening stories in the book - the Harvard Business study of Heidi and Howard. Half the students were assigned to read the story of Heidi, a real-life entrepreneur, and half read a version of the same case with the name changed to Howard. When the professors polled the students they rated Heidi and Howard as equally competent, but regarded Howard as a more appealing colleague while seeing Heidi as selfish and “not the type of person you’d want to hire or work for.” Sandberg states, “This experiment supports what research has already clearly shown: success and likeability are positively correlated for men and negatively correlated for women. When a man is successful, he is liked by both men and women. When a woman is successful, people of both genders like her less.” This and other research arrives at the somewhat shocking conclusion: we evaluate people based on gender stereotypes.
This leads into the discussion about self-promotion. Do women actually downplay their achievements to be liked by our peers? Have you ever hidden an accomplishment because you worried about it sounding like you were bragging? On the other hand have you ever taken credit for an accomplishment and been put down for it? Chances are you have. The way we are socialized seems to make it okay for men to take credit for their accomplishments, but when women step up and take credit they are criticized for self-promotion. Yet women in business are continually told to speak up and talk about their accomplishments so people understand what they are capable of. Are you seeing the double-bind this puts women into?
The other topic Sandberg covers in this chapter is the “gender discount problem.” When a man steps up and helps out there is an indebtedness attached to the offer. When a woman steps up and helps out she is seen to be fitting the norm of being communal and less indebtedness is attached to this offer and therefore less credit or reward is given for the same behaviour. However, if a woman declines to help out, she receives less favourable reviews, while a man who exhibits the same behaviours receives no penalty. Another double-bind because of gender stereotyping - damned if you do and doomed if you don’t.
Sandberg leads this discussion into how the gender discount problem hurts women when negotiating. This is another double-bind women face. Women often don’t negotiate, which leaves them earning less than their male counterparts (the wage gap.) However, if they do advocate for their own interest by negotiating it often backfires on them. Sandberg says, “Since women are expected to be concerned with others, when they advocate for themselves or point to their own value, both men and women react unfavourably.” It is okay for women to negotiate hard when they are fighting for someone else or their own company, but to do so on their own behalf, violates the perceived gender norm.
Sandberg’s advice to help women with advocating on their own behalf is “think personally, act communally.” She advises women to “preface negotiations by explaining that they know that women often get paid less than men so they are going to negotiate rather than accept the original offer. By doing so women position themselves as connected to a group and not just out for themselves; in effect, they are negotiating for all women.”
A couple of years ago I had this discussion with a male station manager from a nuclear plant in the U.S. He quickly identified that the women in his line were paid less than their male peers. He worked hard to rectify that gender wage gap very quickly and advised me that if Women in Nuclear only did one thing they should teach women how to negotiate. I’m sure he didn’t realize at the time the unique obstacles women face when they enter negotiations. I do however, give him a lot of credit for speaking up and fixing what he felt was a very unjust situation.
His actions are exactly what needs to happen. Women cannot make these changes on their own. We need both men and women to understand the gender biases and work together to eliminate them.
Happy National Volunteer Week (NVW)! Volunteers Cast a Beautiful Shadow is the added theme for this year’s celebration, and according to the NVW website, it reflects the positive impact volunteers have on communities across Canada.
Women in Nuclear (WiN)-Canada was built by volunteers and continues to operate its programming and events with volunteers across Canada. Our volunteers fit very nicely into the overall theme of NVW celebrations - Passion Action Impact. WiNners have great passion for the nuclear industry and recognizing the important contribution women make within the industry. They take action by supporting the industry through volunteering on the WiN board, GIRLS Science Club/Camp, Skills Canada young women’s events, speaking at career days, planning chapter meetings, planting trees on Earth Day, planning our annual conference, sitting on the leading team of their local chapter and a host of other activities promoting the industry and the women who contribute to the industry’s success. WiNners make an impact by putting a fresh face on a male-dominated industry and by helping girls and young women recognize the many highly-skilled, well-paid careers available to them in the industry and the importance of science and math in everyday life.
We are stronger as an organization because of the many shadows we cast across the industry. On the flip side our members gain valuable leadership competencies and a broader understanding of the nuclear industry, helping them to develop their own career path and become more informed advocates for the industry.
This week we celebrate all WiNners who help make WiN strong and extend a heartfelt thank you to everyone who volunteers, for their hard work and dedication throughout the year. It is these valuable contributions from our members that have made WiN a respected organization within the industry and in the communities where we live. Well done WiNners!
|
