Sheryl Sandberg's Sisters

The COO of Facebook, Sheryl Sandberg, has just published a book called Lean In. In the last couple of weeks, this has led to a feature in Time and a review in The Economist.

 

Promoting gender diversity in the workplace has been a live issue ever since I joined the workforce, and I have witnessed a series of progress steps and frustrations at first hand.

 

It is obvious that the battle is not yet won. Women now outperform men at all levels of education and qualification, and are represented in the workforce quite fully, at least in the developed countries. Yet women are still hopelessly under-represented at senior levels. This is a human disgrace, and an economic waste, since plainly the many of the most talented are not being used in positions where they fulfil their potential.

 

Most studies on this tend to focus on the highest levels, such as CEO or member of parliament. But in my experience, the imbalance starts at lower levels. As soon as there is a management team of people with their own teams or areas of responsibilities, women tend to be in the minority.

 

Sandberg encourages women to take more control over their careers, and to push a little bit harder. She notices that women are more modest in how they present themselves and seek opportunity.

 

She has some sensible, practical advice. Plainly, one of the obstacles to career progression is the need to balance child bearing. She accepts that women have to find their own balance, but claims that often women make a problem of this before they need to. So instead of making one big decision to leave the workforce for a while, in practice they make a series of smaller decisions, like not applying for positions, which cumulatively do more damage than is necessary.

 

Sandberg also advises early, honest and frequent conversations with life partners about priorities. I agree with this completely, and have seen couple after couple struggling with these dilemmas. There is often little help available, and it is so frightening in a young relationship to initiate difficult conversations about whose career may take precedence, possibilities of changing location or even of living apart for a while, and the timing for kids.

 

This is so tough. I never had to face up to this really. And even if I had, the cultural expectations at the time would have been hanging over us – as the man, my career would probably have been the lead one. This expectation is unfair, but at least it would have offered a guideline. Nowadays, there are only uncertainties in this sort of thing.

 

But that change in expectation is also the best news. In the past, my belief is that it was such cultural expectations that were the biggest inhibitors to female careers. Women of my generation had the benefit of education, a fairer legal system and some sort of diversity awareness in their firms. Yet they still had their parents and their partners’ parents to deal with. It does not surprise me that it takes several generations to bring about real change.

 

So things will sort out in time. Women will demand it. Shareholders will demand it. Younger men will support it. And former cultural constraints will no longer block it.

 

But that is no comfort for my generation of women who fought on the margins, or even for the current generation getting so close but still being stymied. So the challenge is, what can and should be done to accelerate matters?

 

I approve of legal nudges and awareness nudges. So quotas can do good. D&I training should be essential. Bosses should be called to account for their behaviour.

 

There are also structural steps that remain to be taken. Even now, only Scandinavia has acceptable standards of childcare support and paternity leave. And more could be done within companies to facilitate careers that have breaks: there was an excellent Harvard article about this some years back referring to such transitions as onramps and off ramps.

 

The hardest part is what women should do themselves. This is territory that Sandberg is not the first to address, and it has its pitfalls. The risk is always in pushing women to act against their instincts. Sandberg does not quite advocate it, but In the worst examples, I have been on courses where women were advised to be more like men.

 

While it is tempting to accelerate things with such tactics, I believe they should be avoided for several reasons. First, a consequence is that the “wrong” women would then tend to break through, perpetuating negative stereotypes and prejudices. The women who will do the best job of behaving like men are not generally the women with the most to offer as women.

 

Next, the diversity that the business is trying to benefit from is actually diminished. Surely, we are trying to benefit from our differences, not try to mask them?

 

But most important, I think this sort of advice has actually held back more women than it has helped. The best coaching I ever received was to “be yourself”. Anything which works against instinct has a tendency to backfire.

 

As an example to demonstrate this, I had a dancing lesson last week. I am not a good dancer, though I want to improve. One piece of feedback was very revealing. I was informed that if I repeat the same step several times, my frame collapses. So my focusing on one thing, something even more basic fails. The instructors instinct was that this was due to my breathing becoming unnatural.

 

This diagnosis struck a chord (unfortunately, like many good diagnoses, it did not create a solution apart from to be patient and work hard). I have seen the same withy singing. It is only by internalising step one that step two becomes possible, and only when step two is entirely natural can step three be attempted. Breathing is the most basic of all actions, and how we breathe gives away how relaxed we are and the extent to which we have conquered the steps.

 

There is a nice model for this. The progression for any skill should move from unconscious incompetence through conscious incompetence and conscious competence before reaching the stable goal of unconscious competence. In singing, I am finally starting to master the last step. In dancing, I am still on the first one. Breathing gives this away.

 

What has this got to do with work? Well, many of the things recommended for women are tough and go against instinct. As such, they need constant effort and reinforcement, and can become a programme to achieve conscious competence. And conscious competence is not enough. Only a state of peaceful relaxation, epitomised by good breathing and many other things, leads to success.

 

I believe I have seen this in practice. Throughout my career, women always seemed to be the ones trying harder. They went on courses, sought lots of feedback, tried to do the right thing. Sometimes they saw obstacles when they were not there, or became abrasive or suspicious, or lost their natural spirit and obscured their talents. They were more often tired and on edge. In short, the effort to follow the advice offered to women became a constant search for conscious competence, but rarely progressed further.

 

A good example is in networking. True, it is important to chat up the boss, or be seen by the bosses boss, to be visible in a good way. I did it, not very well but I did it. But I did it using my natural strengths, and in a way that allowed some balance. I don’t accept that it is structurally harder for women to network (actually, I think it is a bit easier, as they tend to be physically more noticeable). But many women try to network almost as an obsession, because someone has told them to. A consequence can be a loss of balance, and actually making a less good impression than a natural approach could have done.

 

So, what is my recommendation? First, do follow the steps of Sandberg that come naturally, and do initiate the tough discussions with life partners (who by now should be ready to listen and compromise). Do campaign for structural improvements such as on ramps and off ramps. Other structural improvements can come in company HR policies – as an example placing more emphasis on people’s attributes as a line manager (it does not surprise me to hear Sandberg described as an excellent line manager). The one part of firms that women have fully conquered is the HR department, so surely it is time to use this to improve recruitment and performance management, helping women at the same time?

 

But then don’t listen to all the advice you receive, especially if it seems unnatural. It is better to focus on natural strengths than to become consciously competent at unnatural things. For many women, I believe Sandberg’s advice would do some good and some harm, and the trick will be to choose the recipe that works for you. Lean in, but not into places where you lose balance and the leaning becomes all you can achieve.

 

I hope and believe the current generation of women entering the workforce can be first to achieve its potential. Enough generations have passed now for the unfair blockers to have been removed, at least in most sectors developed countries. So this generation of women can enjoy the luxury of being themselves, and breathe naturally all the way up.