Sheryl Sandberg: "Lean In: Women, Work and the Will to Lead"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-03-14/sheryl-sandberg-lean-women-work-and-will-lead
Growing up in Miami, Fla., Sheryl Sandberg was always at the top of her class. In middle school, she beat high schoolers in a debating contest, and later enrolled at Harvard. After working in government and then at Google, Sandberg joined Facebook. As chief operating officer, she helped lead the social media company to profitability. In a new book, Sandberg writes about her journey to the top of Silicon Valley while balancing a family. She says women hold themselves back from reaching leadership positions and should take more risks. Diane talks with Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg about why women should “lean in” to their careers.
Guests
Sheryl Sandberg
chief operating officer, Facebook
Related Items
Featured Video Clip
Sheryl Sandberg, chief operating officer of Facebook, says one way to encourage more women into leadership positions is to stop calling them "bossy." She said these same girls grow up to be told they're too assertive and aggressive in the workplace. Host Diane Rehm said she, too, was called bossy as a child, especially by other females. "If you go to the playground this weekend you will see people calling little girls bossy, but they almost never call little boys that," Sandberg said.
Watch the full hour of Diane and Sheryl Sandberg's interview.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
This is an OK book. It is an important book. I expected more. Lean In is essentially a longer version of the author's TEDTalk. Sandberg's message is not an easy one to hear. And with any uncomfortable message, she is sure to get criticism. The book is good to start a conversation and point you to the website and, of course, Facebook page.
http://bestbuyalways.blogspot.com
Concluding that women are primarily to blame for their limited success is an insult to the women who have been "leaning in" for decades.
I got my MBA from Northwestern University's Kellogg Graduate School of Business and my CPA without considering the impact having a family would have on my career, or existing gender biases in finance.
Yet despite my education and successes, the barriers have built up over times. Male superiors have asked how I looked in a bikini. I’ve had bosses who didn’t approve of my divorce or personal life. My suggestions and experience have been ignored, ridiculed, or doubted. A boss kept me in isolation after I prevented a $20 million error, only to tell others that I wasn’t a “team player.” I had another boss who was identified in a sexual discrimination lawsuit, leaving him cold to my ambitions. Similar to the women whistleblowers of Enron and WorldCom, I’ve also reported ethical misconduct. I even decided that I would politely ask one boss for severance beyond the three months in my contract. I was fired the next day. Why? I was told, “You can’t be trusted.”
An executive recruiter once apologized when I was once found to be one of a few CFO candidates who had almost all of the prerequisite skills and experiences. Why apologize? He originally told me that he was only forwarding my resume for consideration because I was the only woman candidate.
That was better than the CEO who mistakenly misplaced the phone receiver in the cradle, allowing me to hear him question my reference about how old my kids were and wonder whether I could be a CFO with them being so young. Most people ask about the ages of my children in the interview.
My friends urged me to start a blog at www.mba-mommy.com to share my stories. Nobody would believe them in one sitting.
Why doesn't Sheryl use her power to challenge existing power structures, rather than women who've been "leaning in" for decades?
QUESTION for Sheryl Sandberg:
Have you considered that capitlism may not be an economic system that will allow full participation by all, or even most, of the people in a society?
Thank you.
As a college professor of over 25 years, I have avoided being a department chair or administrator my whole career -- intentionally. I don't like the politics or the demands on my time that take me away from my other interests (family, writing, hobbies, etc.). Last year, I believe, Diane had a show about the lack of college administrators who are women. I felt then, as I do now, that we are missing a key point here: I am a biological anthropologist and I believe most women (of course not all) are innately less competitive and more cooperative than the average man. I think the reason there are fewer women in high corporate realms, college and hospital administrations, and politics is that we have little patience for the competitiveness and the "race to the top" that takes away from negotiation and cooperation. I see nothing wrong with this phenomenon and tire of it being pointed out as a problem without considering human nature and human biology here. Of course I fully support equal pay for equal work, as well as women who wish to pursue these challenges, and am a leader in my profession and my community (and participate in numerous "women in science" ventures), but I think a focus solely on the statistics on executives and administrators overlooks the fundamental and some would say "natural" differences between women and men.
I would like to hear more thoughts on why this is a female-led discussion or a problem for women. Men in corporate leadership positions stand to benefit financially themselves if, for example, their own wives are being paid and rewarded with equal opportunities. Why isn't this more a movement among men to support women in corporate America? It benefits entire households.
I don't like "bossy" women OR men, and I lose respect for both.
POSTER CHILD OF (WHITE UPPER CLASS CAPITALIST PSEUDO-LIBERAL) PRIVILEGE AND TOTALLY OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY. Blue t-shirts on St Patrick's Day, mommy? Really.
She's coming from such a place of privilege. I'm not saying she's not really smart, or has worked very hard, but her experience is jaded by the bubble she lives in. As a suddenly-single mom with a 2 & 3 year old, it took all of my energy to provide, educate and raise my children (now successful college grads). It wasn't until my kids were grown that I could resume the work at a high level, and now own a company. She must have had a lot more help than I did!
Sandberg is wrong when she suggests that women suffer because they do more of the childcare than men. Has she ever considered that many many women WANT to do more of the childcare? That they are happier raising their children than working? Not all women define success as a powerful career and money.
Sandberg is wrong when she suggests that women suffer because they do more of the childcare than men. Has she ever considered that many many women WANT to do more of the childcare? That they are happier raising their children than working? Not all women define success as a powerful career and money.
What do you think about the information out there concerning female leaders backstabbing other women in a "mean girl" behavior? It seems like a pretty bad Catch-22.
Also, "women" does not necessarily equal "motherhood," nor should parenting be just equated with "motherhood."
I was just listening in on the way from work, discussing about how women are in charge of child care. My first thought was about how I found out about my daughter when she was almost 1... I tried to keep in contact with my ex, wanted to be around for the birth, was taken to court and forced to pay $1600 in back child support and fought for over a year to be able to see my daughter and prove I was a worthy individual to be in her life.
I have been told that I have to prove she's a drug addict, or abusive in order to have a chance of custody of my daughter. I have a master's degree in psychology and she was a high school dropout... she has run out of state violating custody orders with my daughter for her own selfish reasons. I was still told that I cannot have custody. My point being, legally, men have to be given the right to be as important to their children before men can take that role as well.
The way we frame issues and the specific language we use both shapes and reflects reality. Every single presentation of this book, including Diane's advertisements and opening, begins with litanies of Sandberg's exceptional intellect, drive, and success and then move directly to the message of her book that "women hold themselves back."
Actually reading the book or listening to the full interview reveals that Sandberg does acknowledge the sexist, systemic barriers and prejudices women face. I think she also recognizes that working-class women and women of color face additional barriers. (and perhaps even those who don't have such exceptional gifts)
Unfortunately, framed as it is, those who are inclined to dismiss discussions of the different experiences of sexism all kinds of women face have all the language they need to keep blaming the women themselves and take no responsibility for changing or challenging the system. They have no need to read the book or listen to interviews, and they won't.
Please, consider re-framing this message with an initial awareness of the systemic misogyny before moving into your particular arguments and ideas. If not, it might just do much more damage than constructive, meaningful good.
I dropped out of the work force 10 years ago when my daughter was born. I've always hated using the term, Stay-at-home mom to describe myself. I loved hearing Sheryl's term, Work-at-home parent! Thanks for giving us this better terminology!
I agree with a lot of what you say, but left out of the conversation is the fact that a lot of women actually want to stay home and take care of kids. That seems to be an important factor.
Also, are Sheryl's children boys or girls?
Hello,
This is a question from my wife:
what can parents do as far as socializing their children so they have the confidence to make these choices?
Thank you.
A lifelong feminist and advocate for gender-equality, here at mid-life--as mom to three boys and professional working with children and adolescents of both genders--the suspicion that nature's forces are more powerful than any of nurture's endeavors sneaks into my consciousness almost daily. I wonder if we might benefit from some genuine curiosity about what our socio- and evolutionary-biologist scholars might say about general gender-based personality and behavior characteristics that have nothing to do with culture or nurture and everything to do with who and how we are as creatures of nature. It seems that from the smallest birds to the largest of our primate cousins, across the animal kingdom there are gender differences that are integral to nature's design. Should we limit one another because of those differences? Never. Should we understand them as natively human rather than only socially engineered? Absolutely. Especially if we really are to commit to all human being and becoming all they are capable of.
A lifelong feminist and advocate for gender-equality, here at mid-life--as mom to three boys and professional working with children and adolescents of both genders--the suspicion that nature's forces are more powerful than any of nurture's endeavors sneaks into my consciousness almost daily. I wonder if we might benefit from some genuine curiosity about what our socio- and evolutionary-biologist scholars might say about general gender-based personality and behavior characteristics that have nothing to do with culture or nurture and everything to do with who and how we are as creatures of nature. It seems that from the smallest birds to the largest of our primate cousins, across the animal kingdom there are gender differences that are integral to nature's design. Should we limit one another because of those differences? Never. Should we understand them as natively human rather than only socially engineered? Absolutely. Especially if we really are to commit to all human being and becoming all they are capable of.
Men who discuss childcare at work are also penalized. Men who have to make occasional accommodations for children with special needs are severely penalized, regardless of performance, because the priority placed on the children is seen as a lack of commitment to the firm. Promotion and layoff decisions are not always made on a rational basis.
Does Mrs. Sandberg have any advice on how parents can raise their daughters so that they have the ability to move into leadership roles when they enter the workforce? What should our schools do? Simply encouraging them at home to lead and assert themselves can only go so far.
The Diane Rehm Show is one of the highlights of my every day life and in over ten years of listening I have never once been disappointed - until this episode today. I always rely on Diane to provide reliable and timely news presented in a balanced and objective manner but this guest was about as enlightening as a lobotomy. What an insult to be subjected to the idiosyncratic musings of this naive, egocentric, and elitist armchair activist who obviously has not even had a twenty first century reality check on gender as but one aspect of the human experience. She seems to know as much about real-life "women's issues" (let alone "men's issues") as Donald Trump knows about bell hooks. How far will her "leaning in" shtick take you when you are the migrant farm worker mother who survives by picking the fruit she eats when she wakes up "so early, at 6 am" ... or the African American grandfather janitor who mops the floor after her executive board room meetings ... or the nameless faceless masses of others who suffer to make ends meet in the current economic meltdown while she ponders new ways to update her profile status? Bring her back in ten years after Facebook becomes yesterday's Friendster and she is having to sell computers for minimum wage at Best Buy. I'm pretty sure she'll have a different perspective.
I support Sheryl completely. I just want to make sure that women who decide be stay at home Mom's should be celebrated too.
I am a educated, intelligent feminist who made the decision to stay home. I celebrate the fact that I have a partnership with my husband where gender does not really play a role in our decisions. We try to work together to figure out how to live our life despite gender expectations...that is the success of feminism.
That women have the expectation to find partners that respect our gender and our rights to live as we want. That is to be celebrated.
I worry that stay at home Mom's get looked down upon when these discussions come up. That I work against feminism if I choose to stay home. We lose as women if that is the message we send.
Let's celebrate Women having choices.
I appreciate Sheryl Sandberg's perspective and that she is bringing this topic into discussion. But I'm with that 5 year old who is already realizing that both mom and dad can't go into space at the same time. I wish I had realized that issue at an early age. I was naive and completely believed the "you can have it all" myth if I just worked hard enough.
Once I had children, I realized my definition of success wasn't the same as the status quo...and I believe that is at the heart of this debate. I didn't want late nights at work and travel that took me away from my children.
I often feel that my friends who chose to stay in the workplace judge those of us who have opted to work from home while our children are little---as if we have let feminism down.
Rather than asking women to become more like the men who hold power, assertive or self-promoting, perhaps we should listen to the different voice of women who often promotive cooperation and listening over being the biggest voice. It may take us longer to get to 50% of the power position, but hopefully we will not lose what we value most in order to get there.
Thank you for addressing imposter syndrome! It's real!
HFox
I have work with many women who have self esteem issues. Many of them were abused as children which is a huge inhibition for most, but not all. Some of these women have no memories before a certain late age, for example age 10 or more, and have no conscious memory of this. I would estimate that 20 to 30% of women have been abused in some way as children (unscientific survey). It also seems that few men are abused as children.
Is this a big factor and what should be do about this as a society?
mbocock@gmail: If your comment had already been posted (we must have been writing at the same time), I wouldn't have found it necessary for adding mine. Thank you for sharing this!
I hope Lean In leads to a broader discussion of parenthood in general. My husband was as unprepared as I was for how parenthood would affect our careers---and despite a great policy in his work place, faced a lot of challenges when he actually took paternity leave.
What is Sheryl's take on the Yahoo CEO who built a nursery in her office for her newborn, then rescinded the tele-work policy for all employees?
Could Sheryl please comment on suggestions to keep organizations "accountable" for really, genuinely helping women? I've worked for a number of organizations (and consult to many now) who have become savvy, perhaps even shrewd, in using the "PC" lingo of teams, empowerment, helping women, etc. and they just don't walk the talk.
Her perspective on this would be valued.
So thoughtful, Beth 6280, and where I hope this conversation matures to in the future. We've covered this ground in this way so many times. Thank you.
Yes, your are right to look at this from a biological/anthropological view. women are denying our innate qualilities which have value- just not corporate or societal value. I, too, did not want to play the "masculinized" corporate game. Women are different from men- in our biology and even brain function. The problem I have with modern day feminism is that it says the ideal feminist success story is to look and act like a man. I was raised with the modern feminist view that said to be equal to a man- you have to be like a man. This is just a form of chauvinism- masculine qualities are more valued than feminine ones. We define success in a masculine way- in a mans world. Women are biologically more empathetic than men, but here is no place for empathy in the male dominated corporate America. Feminine qualities are still considered "weak" and unprofessional. I think the modern feminists thought that if women played the corporate game of acting like men in their pantsuits, they would rise to the top and change the structure from the inside out. Create work and political environments that encouraged cooperation, nurture, and allowed women to take time off to have children without falling off the corporate cliff never to be allowed in again. But it hasn't happened. I think the problems are economic and our capitalist structure - employers love a good deal - and if you can hire a woman who is just as qualified as a man and willing to work twice as hard for 70% of the pay - its a profitable corporate model. Why change? Sandburg has failed to address the fact that it may be women are choosing not to play this corporate game that's stacked against them anyway. That maybe women value different things than men and that we see a bigger picture than just individual needs.