Interesting Article: "'Leaning In' Isn't the Answer"

jlaOK · October 2014

Saw this article on twitter and thought it was really interesting. Interested to get your thoughts.

https://www.businessinsider.com/women-tech-lean-in-sheryl-sandberg-2013-12

Edit: An excerpt for those who can't read the article:

What needs to change is how and when women work. Being told to “lean in” by itself is not useful. Instead, women need to come together and demand that we are given the flexibility to excel in our jobs; to admit that we have kids and not hide that fact in fear that it will stunt our career opportunities; to occasionally bring a child into the office to quietly do homework on a day when school is out or daycare is unavailable.

Let’s demand that corporate America’s norms change to accommodate women — those who want to have families and realize that having a family does NOT make us work less or achieve less. Companies that dictate our schedules, decide when and how we work, and believe that a pregnant woman is a liability is what prevents women from rising to the top. Until we can change those attitudes, “leaning in” won’t work.

Beevol · October 2014

I've seen enough studies that show that men are more likely to receive flexible schedules than women when they ask to know that this wont truly solve the problem. IMO, it's not until we expect men to be equal parents that we will remove the glass ceiling.

If only women take maternity leave, then that sets up a real bias toward men. If only women are expected to stay home with a sick kid, and only women are expected to ask if their kid can come to the office to work quietly on a day that there is no school, then there is a real bias toward men. For any employer, no matter how they feel about the given woman's abilities.

kristynachicago · October 2014

As a mom working full time in the most corporate environment I can think of (I work for a financial firm/asset manager), this story/idea seems like a dream sequence to me. I crave flexibility, but my company is just so stuck in the 1950s, I never see it happening. I do my job and do it well, but my company loyalty is dwindling...just knowing that flexibility would be extended to everyone, moms, dads, those that are single, etc., would make my work environment so, so, so much better.

jlaOK · October 2014

Beevol said:

I've seen enough studies that show that men are more likely to receive flexible schedules than women when they ask to know that this wont truly solve the problem. IMO, it's not until we expect men to be equal parents that we will remove the glass ceiling.

If only women take maternity leave, then that sets up a real bias toward men. If only women are expected to stay home with a sick kid, and only women are expected to ask if their kid can come to the office to work quietly on a day that there is no school, then there is a real bias toward men. For any employer, no matter how they feel about the given woman's abilities.

I agree and do feel as though we are trending towards 50/50 parental roles.

banks81 · October 2014

amy052006 said:

I really enjoyed this, in not small part because I think Lean In is total and complete BS. Sandberg's suggestions and values are what I want for my family, and not how I want to raise my kids. I always took particular exception with her somewhat dismissive "marry a supportive spouse" crock of shit. My husband could not be more supportive or hands on -- that doesn't mean I don't want to be hands on myself to also be fulfilled. I want my chance to be class mom and I want to be able to be there for my sick kid.

It's been a while since I read Lean In. I'm sure there were aspects of it that I also don't agree with. But, for the most part, I think it's a great read for those who WANT to Lean In. I think she even indicates that it's not for everyone and that's fine. But, for those that do, I completely agree that it's important to have a supportive spouse. I was just saying the other day that there's no way I could have the job I do without my husband's support. I travel for work and sometimes have to work late hours. So we basically split everything household and child related 50/50. We do what we can and jump in for the other one when we are bombarded with something at work (or even just social related).

Also - just because I "Lean In", which basically means I want to continue my growth at work, doesn't mean I won't be able to volunteer in my child's classroom (when the time comes) or stay home when she's sick. I just may not be able to do it all of the time, and that's perfectly fine with me.

dashofreality · October 2014

I would love to see the woman part taken out of this. I really don't understand why Corporate America isn't embracing flexibility. There are a lot of people (but not all) that would take a reduced salary for flexibility, and I would bet the vast majority of those people are as productive, if not more productive, then they were before. There have been studies where the average worker wastes 40 - 70% of their work time not working.

It just seems like a no brainer to me to start including flexible work arrangements in compensation packages. I only see upside for the company - saves them money, more loyalty, and productivity. As a manager if they only way that you can determine your employees worth is by the amount of facetime they put in, you shouldn't be a manager.

banks81 · October 2014

amy052006 said:

banks81 said:

amy052006 said:

I really enjoyed this, in not small part because I think Lean In is total and complete BS. Sandberg's suggestions and values are what I want for my family, and not how I want to raise my kids. I always took particular exception with her somewhat dismissive "marry a supportive spouse" crock of shit. My husband could not be more supportive or hands on -- that doesn't mean I don't want to be hands on myself to also be fulfilled. I want my chance to be class mom and I want to be able to be there for my sick kid.

It's been a while since I read Lean In. I'm sure there were aspects of it that I also don't agree with. But, for the most part, I think it's a great read for those who WANT to Lean In. I think she even indicates that it's not for everyone and that's fine. But, for those that do, I completely agree that it's important to have a supportive spouse. I was just saying the other day that there's no way I could have the job I do without my husband's support. I travel for work and sometimes have to work late hours. So we basically split everything household and child related 50/50. We do what we can and jump in for the other one when we are bombarded with something at work (or even just social related).

Also - just because I "Lean In", which basically means I want to continue my growth at work, doesn't mean I won't be able to volunteer in my child's classroom (when the time comes) or stay home when she's sick. I just may not be able to do it all of the time, and that's perfectly fine with me.

Well, I'd say it is important for ANYONE to have a supportive spouse. But essentially she was saying you need to marry a man who will take on the traditional "wife" role so you can "lean in" and run like the "boys".

Yeah, the lifestyle of the "boys" sucks. And to say that is what you need to reach the c-suite is just short sighted. There are plenty of ways to continue growth in your career and also have a life.

Yes, this I agree with!

CarrieB. · October 2014

amy052006 said:

ClaryPax said:

I'm never going to make it to the c suite. It is nothing that I want to do. I am a department head, and do not wish to be a director therefore my career path is complete at the moment. There is no more upward mobility unless I move to another type of organization. I can move sideways, but not up.

I don't understand why we all have to lean in. What ever happened to working and then going home? I learn new things, take on new challenges etc etc, but I'm not going to work 60+ hours a week. All my leaning in happens during my 40 hour work week. Maybe it is asking too much, but I would like to see a lot more job sharing, part time opportunities where you don't lose so much in terms of wages and benefits. My job hours are pretty flexible, so I can't fault my employer with that, but flexibility in others. Basically jobs are not friendly to parents- the end. A lot more things need to change then just your boss letting you log in for 2 hours after the kids go to bed, so you can get your 80 hour week in.
I feel like I am repeating myself here. I read a whole book on this once, on how American parents have basically no support in society, but now I can't think of all the points the book made.

Amen. I get "above and beyond" being valued, but to an extent it is effing nuts. It really is. And the c suite isn't the end all be all of success.

nd it's not a mom issue, or even a kid issue. It's a "what we value is screwed up" issue. A single 28 year old dude with no kids shouldn't be in the office 80 hours a week either -- we've been somehow duped into thinking that is ok and valuing that. Quite literally nothing is that important.

My DH talk about this all the time and how people who work that much are basically no different than a hoarder, except they are hoarding money. What good is a paycheck if all you do is work?

2chatter · October 2014

The corporate culture where I am is very flexible and permissive for working parents - to a point. The people who make the senior management level have one or two nannies. Across the board. They talk about how on Tuesdays (or whatever night) they are home for dinner with their kids like it's some sort of awesome benefit. They don't leave the office to get the kids from day care, and their flexibility is tucking the kids in at 8:30 then logging back in at 9:00 to work more. More, more, more.

So I appreciate what this article says. I'd like to see it fleshed out with real examples of real people who have real schedules and real lives so it's more concrete and tangible. How many hours a week are senior managers working? How much does the flexibility ultimately weigh on them? I feel like flexibility is a little bit of a Pandora's Box, and misdirected, it hurts families. I say this while I am working my 10th hour today standing at the bar in my house so I can answer DD's homework questions and have a couple more hours ahead of me.

MommyAtty · October 2014

I know it's uncool to like Lean In, but I did. A lot. I think most of the people who don't either weren't her target audience (high achieving, educated career women who are shooting for high powered positions) or are pissed that getting those types of positions requires hard work and long hours.

She says in the book in several places that a whole lot of other things need to change. But she chooses to focus on what women have control over. We do have the option to negotiate. We have the option to apply for jobs that are a reach. We have the option to not sit in the back row at meetings but to claim our seats at the Big Kids table. We have the option to take risks. We have the option to support each other and not say shit like "I would never want to work for a woman."

But I agree a whole lot else needs to change. It's not the answer, it's part of the answer. The article has good points, but it missed the point of the book.

dashofreality · October 2014

amy052006 said:

dashofreality said:

I would love to see the woman part taken out of this. I really don't understand why Corporate America isn't embracing flexibility. There are a lot of people (but not all) that would take a reduced salary for flexibility, and I would bet the vast majority of those people are as productive, if not more productive, then they were before. There have been studies where the average worker wastes 40 - 70% of their work time not working.
It just seems like a no brainer to me to start including flexible work arrangements in compensation packages. I only see upside for the company - saves them money, more loyalty, and productivity. As a manager if they only way that you can determine your employees worth is by the amount of facetime they put in, you shouldn't be a manager.

Honest answer? Frankly I think lots of people have a "well I never got it, so why should someone else have it" attitude. I've especially encountered this with higher level female managers -- those who either don't have kids and "don't get it" or who feel life they did it, so should you. Sacrifice is the price you pay.

Is that a generalization? Definitely. Are there other things at play -- undoubtedly. But just anecdotally I always found my own male managers more understanding of flexibility issues, probably in no small part because they had SAH spouses who handled that shit for them and almost felt bad for me. Not that that is ok either, but yeah, IME I think that is where it comes from.

I do agree, but I guess I see this tying into what @clarypax was saying about not everyone wanting c-suite. A lot of men and women want good jobs and to work hard, just not ridiculously. The ones that want to 'sacrifice' can, and theoretically would have a better shot at the c-suite.

I realize this isn't likely to change, but I guess in my utopia corporate world flexibility could be a career choice. Just like it is now accepted that some choose to work at a nonprofit for less pay, I would like it to be more popular to be able to work a flexible job for less pay.

rubber_chicken · October 2014

I have to disagree with the idea that the people who are best suited for the c suite are the people who sacrifice all else to work 80 hours a week.

Maybe our economy and society would not be in such a downward spiral if we had more diversity at the top. Not just diversity in terms of sex, race etc. but diversity of THOUGHT. There's more than one way to be successful.

2chatter · October 2014

PrivacyWanted
But in many offices/fields I think "flexibility" really just means more availability.
And there's a bigger expectation of more hours, and not really having any "just family time." If you want to have that time to check out you're put on the "not c-suite bound" path even if you do your work and do it well.

IN BOX UGH

THIS! This is my world.

CarrieB. · October 2014

I really enjoyed Bringing up Bebe because of the section on free daycare/preschool. I hope we may slowly be moving in that direction in the US. We have free all day 4K in my neighborhood and some schools have free 3K.

groovygrl · October 2014

I also liked lean in and of course not everyone has to follow that path not should or can or will want to etc.

My question for all the articles out there saying we need this and that to move ahead is ----how??? does one advocate and contribute to making these changes? I never see good ideas on how average person can go to hr at their employer and advocate for this or maybe start a group to advocate for it at their employer. It is one thing to say we need this, this policy needs to change, the govt needs to change, society needs to change, but never telling people how to accomplish that in realistic nonthreatening ways is pointless. Sure you can quit and work at a more family friendly place but at what price? Lean in is about more women being at the table and in positions of influence which could actually help accomplish these types of goals regardless of if you believe in what she says or personally follow it.

It seems to me that some hands on tools would be helpful in addition t all the rhetoric about what should happen .

And honestly, the lean in circles actually would provide that type of support if someone formed one at their workplace.

And sorry this is a ramble I am on my phone lol.

kristinc01 · October 2014

amy052006 said:

banks81 said:

amy052006 said:

I really enjoyed this, in not small part because I think Lean In is total and complete BS. Sandberg's suggestions and values are what I want for my family, and not how I want to raise my kids. I always took particular exception with her somewhat dismissive "marry a supportive spouse" crock of shit. My husband could not be more supportive or hands on -- that doesn't mean I don't want to be hands on myself to also be fulfilled. I want my chance to be class mom and I want to be able to be there for my sick kid.

It's been a while since I read Lean In. I'm sure there were aspects of it that I also don't agree with. But, for the most part, I think it's a great read for those who WANT to Lean In. I think she even indicates that it's not for everyone and that's fine. But, for those that do, I completely agree that it's important to have a supportive spouse. I was just saying the other day that there's no way I could have the job I do without my husband's support. I travel for work and sometimes have to work late hours. So we basically split everything household and child related 50/50. We do what we can and jump in for the other one when we are bombarded with something at work (or even just social related).

Also - just because I "Lean In", which basically means I want to continue my growth at work, doesn't mean I won't be able to volunteer in my child's classroom (when the time comes) or stay home when she's sick. I just may not be able to do it all of the time, and that's perfectly fine with me.

Well, I'd say it is important for ANYONE to have a supportive spouse. But essentially she was saying you need to marry a man who will take on the traditional "wife" role so you can "lean in" and run like the "boys".

Yeah, the lifestyle of the "boys" sucks. And to say that is what you need to reach the c-suite is just short sighted. There are plenty of ways to continue growth in your career and also have a life.

I read the book and didn't come away with the idea that you and your husband need to swap traditional roles to make it work. I felt like she just said expect 50% home help from your spouse and prove yourself in the office that you are equal to the men. Part of creating parity in the office is allowing men to fulfill parenting roles - such as taking paternity leave and being the one that stays home when there is a sick child, chaperoning field trips. If you create and support equal spouse/gender expectations in the home and office that is how you lean in and make strides in the work force.

In no way is Lean In advocating finding a husband to do all the housework and running errands and child care in order for the wife to work 80+ hours a week. I think her husband has a equally demanding job he just also helps with household chores and children at home. In her mind they are 50/50 parents.

Step 1 is to not call household chores or child caring duties a "mom or "wife" roles and don't label anything a man or women role. It will help get women on equal footing a little faster.

kmh2201 · October 2014

I just wish that American workplaces were supportive of employees who want their families to be #1 and work be #2. I work to provide a good living for my kids, and so we can save some money for them when they go to college, and so DH and I can actually enjoy retirement and not have to work when we're 85 years old. I'm with some of the PP's who said, "what's so wrong with working a job and then going home"? When I'm home, I want be able to devote myself to being a mom and a wife.

MommyAtty · October 2014

kmh2201 said:

I just wish that American workplaces were supportive of employees who want their families to be #1 and work be #2. I work to provide a good living for my kids, and so we can save some money for them when they go to college, and so DH and I can actually enjoy retirement and not have to work when we're 85 years old. I'm with some of the PP's who said, "what's so wrong with working a job and then going home"? When I'm home, I want be able to devote myself to being a mom and a wife.

There's nothing wrong with it. But life is about choices. Do I give up extra time and money for a child? Do i choose to have one child that I can give all my resources to or do I give that child a sibling and split resources, believing the sibling makes up for diminished resources? Do I go after a job that will pay a ton or do I choose a job where I will make less but I get to shut off at 5:00?

I have no problem with anyone choosing differently than I have. But I do have a problem with people who are mad they don't get the goodies I do when they also don't work as much or as well as I do. I sacrificed a lot for my career, and I still do. I would love more balance, but I'm not pissed at my admin or junior attorneys who have chosen to level themselves and quit climbing because those people have more spare time than I do. I realize I've made my choices and continue to make those choices.

kikimeemee · October 2014

CarrieB. said:
I really enjoyed Bringing up Bebe because of the section on free daycare/preschool. I hope we may slowly be moving in that direction in the US. We have free all day 4K in my neighborhood and some schools have free 3K.

If our government wasn't corrupt and handled money well, then I'd agree more with things like paid maternity leaves and daycare provided by tax money. For now, any time I hear people talk abt better government programs I cringe bc I just don't trust that paying higher taxes will benefit middle America. :-( I'm sorry to be so pessimistic but I just don't feel like the extra tax dollars we'd have to pay for these benefits would go to programs to help improve the working world for middle class/upper middle class families.

:-<

owlet3 · October 2014

kmh2201 said:

I just wish that American workplaces were supportive of employees who want their families to be #1 and work be #2. I work to provide a good living for my kids, and so we can save some money for them when they go to college, and so DH and I can actually enjoy retirement and not have to work when we're 85 years old. I'm with some of the PP's who said, "what's so wrong with working a job and then going home"? When I'm home, I want be able to devote myself to being a mom and a wife.

I would like the America work place to understand that I hold working and raising a family in equal esteem, but I would not expect the American work place to reward me while keeping them as #2. Plenty of individuals, some not Americans, will continue to keep work as #1 and ask for little concessions while they make their way to the top... It is a sacrifice and not for everybody.

kikimeemee · October 2014

Working 50-60 hour weeks doesn't always equal more money or probability of promotion. I'm appalled at how many jobs state they are 40 hour workweeks that end up being 50 hrs and pay under $50,000.

We are working in "leaner" times and not paid for the extra work. I hate that word "leaner" -- A terrible buzz word that tries to justify working people like dogs.

I didn't read "Lean in" but I'm sure there are some great points in her book. Maybe some women do need to lean in to satisfy the career gal inside but we should all decide for ourselves. And different seasons require different approaches.

Want a personalized experience?

Interesting Article: "'Leaning In' Isn't the Answer"

Re: Interesting Article: "'Leaning In' Isn't the Answer"

Choose Another Board

Search Boards

Want a personalized experience?

Interesting Article: "'Leaning In' Isn't the Answer"

Re: Interesting Article: &quot;'Leaning In' Isn't the Answer&quot;

Choose Another Board

Search Boards

Re: Interesting Article: "'Leaning In' Isn't the Answer"