Feminism is My Frenemy

My friend Barb and I were talking today about the state of feminism. I am fascinated by everything relating to women and expanding women's power, yet I cringe at some feminist's grievance and demand based approach to feminism. We have to work hard to build infrastructure to support women's advancement in greater numbers across all sectors, first and foremost. We also need to Obama-ize feminism, ie, move beyond the status quo of grievances and on to the next stage of hopefuleness. Trust me, I know this is still fuzzy!

The Hillary Kerfuffle

The blogosphere is alight with commentary on Obama's selection of Hillary for Secretary of State. A Huffington Post article on the topic has generated over 17,500 comments http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/13/hillary-clinton-secretary_n_143735.html. By comparison, a post by Gavin Newsom is barely breaking into double digits - so much for electric cars. Back to the Team of Rivals. I would love to see Hillary stay in the Senate and I love the idea of her being Secretary of State. Sorry to the angry Hillary opponents. The American Prospect wrote this about Timothy Geithner in September, "In a deep crisis, truly talented and effective people can earn broad respect." The same should hold true for Hillary.

Some that oppose Hillary simply want big change and a much more progressive agenda. They are going to have a rough ride in the next year as I predict many more disappointments to come. Let's be realistic, not much is possible in a financial meltdown and with a President who has said that he is Pay as you go (or would be in more normal times). Get your antacid ready.

The Closed Circuit: A Top Tip Towards Ending the Blame Game

Have you ever found yourself justifying yourself repeatedly in your mind, over and over again. If so, consider this: you're wrong. You’ve got a problem with your own story. You don’t believe yourself, otherwise your mind would be settled and you would have stopped trying to prove your point to your most gullible jurist: YOU! Back up. Find the flaw in what you have contributed to the situation and address it. Blaming someone else does not move you forward and only after you’ve addressed your contribution to the problem will your mind be at ease.

Can Anyone Be A Visionary?

Leadership literature often makes the case that anyone can be a good leader with the appropriate training, self-awareness and discipline. I haven't yet seen the question of whether anyone can be a visionary. Here, I'll make the case that, yes, anyone can be a visionary. As fodder, I compare two strategic planning sessions for the same organization with the same board members. Both sessions started with visioning exercises. The first year, we came up with a broad, credible and most importantly, energizing vision. This vision infused the entire day with enthusiasm and drove our decisions in the right direction. A year later, we skimped on time and planning for our visioning session. Each of us chimed in with great ideas about our long term vision. Yet, a down economy can make people practical and some ideas were met with splashes of cold water. Without the discipline of "greenlighting" all ideas, we were quickly bogged down. Vision requires a few simple things: frame an open mindset, spend the time, and greenlight all ideas with discipline and optimism. As Steve Jobs has said, vision is connecting the dots. Anyone can be visionary with the right framework.

La Force D'un Couple

In the commemorative edition of Paris Match (the French version of Life magazine), there is a captivating photo of Barack and Michelle Obama's embrace onstage at Grant Park. The caption gushes "they are alone in the world in front of millions of spectators. Barack et Michelle Obama, Mister President et la First Lady, la victoire de la passion." In this photo, the Obamas look like the winners of the tango Olympics; the intensity of their relationship leaps off the page. I had not seen their relationship portrayed this way in the American press.

I double-checked. Time magazine features a photo of the very same moment from a different angle. The affect is completly different. The Obamas look like a pleasant middle-aged couple who get along with ease. It's caption reads, "Yes, they can. The President-elect shares an embrace with the future First Lady. The couple have promised their children a White House puppy."

I know we Americans are puritans, but really: a puppy?

The French narrative about Barack Obama glorifies his passion for his wife and attributes at least some of his political success to his passion. It seems that Americans, in their demand for family values symbolism, throws cold water on our leader's passions, and their marriages for that matter. What kind of model is that?

After many years of marriage, our most ambitious hope is a puppy.

The Obamas appear to have an electric relationship and we should be granted the ability to embrace them. Let's see if the American media can get it right next time.

The Obamas have a lot of hopes pinned on them and I have another hope to add: maybe, the Obamas can restore faith in marriage.

Ruthless Ambition: More of That

What makes people angry in the world of politics and ideas? A good friend of mine ran for city council this fall and she spoke eloquently about the small things that make city life enjoyable. As she discussed her vision for her community, she reminded me of Jane Jacobs’ “The Rise and Fall of Great American Cities”, with an eye to the closely observed detail. In 1960, when Jane Jacobs published her book,

“some critics used adjectives like "triumphant" and "seminal" to describe the book while others... eviscerated her ideas. The battles she ignited are still being fought, and the criticism was perhaps inevitable, given that such an ambitious work was produced by somebody who had not finished college, much less become an established professional in the field. Indisputably, the book was as radically challenging to conventional thinking as Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring," which helped engender the environmental movement, would be the next year, and Betty Friedan's "The Feminine Mystique," which deeply affected perceptions of relations between the sexes, would be in 1963.” NYT 2006 obituary

Like Jane Jacobs, my friend has many admirers who call her their “hero” in thank you notes and e-mails. She also had a critic who said she had run a negative campaign (with no specific examples) and cited her “blind ambition” in a complaint. This tempest in a teapot has me thinking about the nature of controversy.

There's no question that my friend was running for office to gain power to implement her ideas. And there will always be those that disagree with a candidate’s ideas. We can’t be so naive to believe that seeking power and shaking up the establishment will always be met with smiles and approval. The only way we will enjoy smooth sailing is if we field candidates who wait in line and have few fresh ideas that would disrupt the status quo.

When we have critics, we must listen for the kernel of truth that they are so desperate, if ill-equipped, to convey and we must adjust our tactics where appropriate. We must also plow forward and loudly encourage those with ambition and vision, who while perhaps imperfect, are our engines of progress and reform.

Oprah's Human Hanky

Thanks to Sam Perry for allowing me and Katie Stanton to re-live his election night celebration with Oprah leaning on his shoulder. While election night was emotional for many of us, this photo represents the gleeful week after.

It’s a Downturn, Is Your Team Happy?

Most people are happy to have a job as they see unemployment rise and their 401k fall off a cliff. Instead of being satisfied that retention is a non-issue, now is the time to double down and help your team perform in ever more productive and innovative ways.

Yes, I'm talking to you. A Gallup study in 2003 found that only 28% of employees were fully engaged in their jobs. (more on Gallup with citation below).

First, a good metaphor.

In their book, Made to Stick, Chip and Dan Heath describe Stephen Covey’s sticky metaphor for job satisfaction. It is based on a poll of 23,000 employees drawn from a number of companies and industries. Findings are:
·37% said they have a clear understanding of what their organization is trying to achieve and why.
·Only one in five was enthusiastic about their team’s and organization’s goals.
·Only one in five said they had a clear line of sight between their tasks and their team’s and organization’s goals
·Only 15% felt that their organization fully enables them to execute key goals.
·Only 1 in 5 fully trusted the organization that they work for.

If, say, a soccer team had these same scores, only 4 of the 11 players on the field would know which goal is theirs. Only 2 of 11 would care. Only 2 of 11 would know what position they play and know exactly what they are supposed to do. And all but 2 players, would, in some way, be competing against their own team members rather than the opponent.

Below is a simple test drawn from the Gallup Q12 instrument (a survey designed to measure employee engagement. It has been used on thousands of work units and millions of employees):

The Q12 Index

1) Do you know what is expected of you at work?
2) Do you have the materials and equipment to do your work right?
3) At work, do you have the opportunity to do what you do best every day?
4) In the last seven days, have you received recognition or praise for doing good work?
5) Does your supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about you as a person?
6) Is there someone at work who encourages your development?
7) At work, do your opinions seem to count?
8) Does the mission/purpose of your company make you feel your job is important?
9) Are your associates (fellow employees) committed to doing quality work?
10) Do you have a best friend at work?
11) In the last six months, has someone at work talked to you about your progress?
12) In the last year, have you had opportunities to learn and grow?
(From the Gallup Management Journal, “Feedback for Real” Author: John Thackray)

Do all your team members reply “Yes” to these questions? If not, use your lifeline.

A Push or a Pull: More Positions of Power for Women

I have long held the view that there are no longer any "women's" issues. Women's issues, those subset of issues that affect women more directly, are a ghetto. It's not to say that the women's issues of yesterday are trivial. It's that I believe all issues are women's concern. If there is any remaining "issue", it is gaining more positions of power for women in all sectors: private, public and non-profit.

In a 19 year study of 215 Fortune 500 firms, Roy Adler shows a strong correlation between a good record of promoting women into the executive suite and high profitability. Three measures of profitability were used to demonstrate that the 25 Fortune 500 firms with the best record of promoting women to high positions are between 18 and 69 percent more profitable than the median Fortune 500 firms in their industries.

What's going on? Some have said that profitable firms are more able to experiment with promoting women. I would guess that companies with more women in senior positions have higher employee retention rates and promote more from within - great indications of well-managed companies.

In any case, the data support the huge benefit of having women in the highest ranks. Sounds like a pull, not a push.

Now More Than Ever: When Women Vote, Democrats Win

When women vote, Democrats win. My favorite corollary: when women run, women vote. According to exit polls on November 4th, 56% of women gave Obama their vote, compared to 49% of men. The last election with as large a gender gap was 1992, the Year of the Woman, when anger surrounding the Anita Hill hearings drove a gender gap of 8% for Clinton and women's representation in Congress rose from 6% to 10%. This year, women's Congressional representation rose from 16% to 17%.

Another opportunity to drive women's devotion to the Democratic ticket is upon us: senior hires in the executive branch. Will President Obama do better than past Presidents in his appointments? Keep your eye on www.change.gov.

Obama Victory

Tyranny Cuts off the Singers Head
But the Voice
from the Bottom of the Well
Returns to the Secret Springs of the Earth
And Rises
Out of Nowhere
Through the Mouths of the People!

- Pablo Neruda

Sophie Hahn for Berkeley City Council

In the weeks since I wrote my orignal post about Sophie Hahn's race for City Council, I've had the pleasure of meeting and talking to many District 5 voters about Sophie's candidacy. I have known Sophie Hahn since 1983 and she has been a close advisor and mentor to me for 25 years. While campaigning with Sophie at the Spice of Life fair, I talked with many voters. I was particularly struck when I and another voter listenend to Sophie speak about the scaling of the proposed Safeway in ways that mezmerised us with her keen intellect, passion and historic understanding of the area. If Sophie can stop people in their tracks with a discussion of square footage, imagine how the community will want to listen to her on the full range of issues facing Berkeley. She changed the mind of every voter that I saw her speak to that day. Those that have heard Sophie in public forums and endorsement meetings say "Sophie blew me away". I would encourage any voter in District 5 to call Sophie and see for yourself what I am talking about.

As a co-founder and Founding Executive Director of Emerge America, the premier training program for Democratic women, I have met with many wonderful candidates for
public office across the country. Sophie Hahn is special among them. She has inspired my work at Emerge over the last seven years and I have often thought (out loud with my board of directors) "How would this program help women like Sophie Hahn represent us?" This election represents a unique opportunity to elect someone who sees every aspect of Berkeley within a broad long-range vision for the city. There are few people who have Sophie's unique combination of gifts: her top caliber education and work experience, her passion, vision and leadership, and her deeply felt caring for her community. People like Sophie don't step up often enough. This is a unique opportunity for Berkeley.

The Negotiation Gap

My friend Peter was hiring a marketing manager for his technology company and asked a strong candidate about her salary requirements. She replied, "In my last job, I made $75,000, but I....". Peter stopped her before she talked her way down the pay scale and offered her $85,000 on the spot. He didn't want to deal with the office politics when she found out that others were making more because they had done a better job in their negotiations.

In a recent study published in Time magazine http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1843323,00.html, researchers found that sex role stereotypes alone could explain a large proportion of the difference in earnings between men with traditional views of gender roles (ie, men who have a wife to do all the housework and child care) and women with traditional views of gender roles (those with two full-time jobs). Somewhere in the middle were men and women who hold egalitarian views of gender roles. No doubt, some of the persistent wage gap is one's own attitudes and how these attitudes are perceived by employers. Whatever the causes for the persistently large wage gap, an important method for addressing this gap is improving women's negotiation skills through training.

Have Millennial Women Moved Beyond Feminism?

Written with Barb Bylenga

Talking to a Millennial (ages 15-29) about feminism is like talking to an Alaskan about heatstroke. They’ve heard of it, sure, and what they’ve heard sounds pretty unpleasant—but it’s not a part of their world. Not at all. Maya, a 20-year-old woman living in New York, rolled her eyes when asked in a market research interview how she felt about women’s issues. “Oh, I’m no feminist,” she said. Rea, a 21-year-old in LA, had difficulty even comprehending a question about competing for jobs with men: “What do you mean? I don’t see any distinction, like, at all. Maybe I would sell myself short as a professional football player, but that’s just because I don’t like football.” Older feminists, like ourselves, initially react to this attitude with concern: How can the fight for gender equality ever be won if the next generation couldn’t care less?

The Millennial attitude towards feminism reflects the general cultural move towards a post-grievance society. They don’t blame men for gender barriers; instead they view them as a personal challenge to overcome. Therefore, success is within their personal power, and not dependent on the work of the sisterhood to achieve. The mindset of the younger generation exalts the power of the individual, so much so that among this generation, identity politics have largely lost their resonance. Challenges are individual challenges, no longer group challenges. It’s even been coined the “splinter generation” by some within the generation. As the website splintergeneration.com points out, “Our generation is split into a million different cultures and subcultures, whether they are religious, musical, literary, racial, class-based or consumer-based.” They do not see themselves as having power as a group as Boomers did. They identify with much smaller individualistic passions, an attitude that is supported and fueled by advances in technology.

This cultural shift explains much of the divide in how each generation views feminism. Millennial women live in a world where they believe they are equal, for the most part believe they are treated as equal, and importantly, they don’t believe being angry about the past gets you anywhere. In some ways you could claim that the Millenials live in the world Boomer women were fighting for; that they have what Boomer women want. Boomer women, on the other hand, grew up within a culture in which they had to fight for equality and it is fair to say their grievances are still strong. Therefore to them, the fight must continue on or we will lose sacred ground. It’s not surprising that Boomer women look at younger women and say: Wow, they have a very different worldview; I don’t understand these women, they’re not like me.

The outcome of the Democratic nomination process clearly illustrates the changing of the guard. Much of Obama’s magnetism with Millenials comes from the fact that he elevated himself above grievances. His indifference about race gave him credibility as a true catalyst for change, and importantly created a relevancy with the generation that allowed them to believe they have someone who “gets them.” Obama is a visionary in this post-grievance generation.

While Hillary single-handedly achieved extraordinary gains for women’s leadership, she didn’t embrace the post-grievance zeitgeist that is fundamental to the Millennial identity. Unlike many feminists, Millennial women didn’t see her as a critical chance to save the women’s agenda. In fact they could care less that she is a woman because to them it’s not about gender, it’s about embracing their mindset. While Hillary was by no means a battle-axe feminist, she closely aligned herself with an attitude that persists among old school feminists: that you have to fit into the man’s world. She worked too hard at aligning her persona with what she “isn’t” instead of recognizing that times have changed and being a woman is just fine. Beyond a few tears, she never carved her own authentic feminine place.

Sarah Palin, on the other hand, does a better job than Hillary of reflecting Millenials’ attitudes about being a woman. She isn’t running as a female trying to be as tough as a male – she is simply a tough female. She’s comfortable with her gender and doesn’t seem concerned about representing women’s voices. In this regard, if perhaps none other, she represents the new generation. Unfortunately for her as a candidate, she did not shed group identity altogether. She relies on class politics in her stump speeches and does not have broad appeal beyond her base. Regardless, greater subject mastery would serve her well in any future race.

The first woman president will be a full-blown post-grievance candidate, not dissimilar to Barack Obama. She will not strive to become a part of the old guard. Instead, she will rise above the fight with her own female persona naturally shining through.

While there is much work to be done in the fight for equal rights, old school feminists and traditional civil rights leaders will not be able to reverse this world-view in the younger generation. Without a change in voice, they will be increasingly seen as out of touch and irrelevant, just as Hillary supporters’ post-nomination demands and Jesse Jackson’s criticisms of Barack have been met with sighs.

Millennial women represent something hopeful. Instead of being dismissive of their style and approach, the old guard should count the attitude of their daughters and sons as the fruit of their efforts. This mere act of tossing away generations of grievances may seem terrifying, yet we need to better appreciate Millenial attitudes and speak to their beliefs to engage them in the work that is yet to be accomplished.

Bad Attitudes Towards Governance: Penny Wise, Pound Foolish

"Government is the name we give to the things we choose to do together." Barney Frank

It is this attitude that is more prevalent in France and the UK that allowed Europe to lead the way in resolving the current financial crisis. As Republicans have worked toward reducing government's scope and role in regulation, we have compromised our ability to move quickly and decisively. As Paul Krugman points out, the Treasury Department was almost like FEMA - depleted of its civil service talent by years of departures due to politicization and political appointments of relative novices. Hank Paulson has been pulling some of his trusted direct reports into the Treasury Department out of their gilded retirements from "Government" Sachs to work on the federal bailout. We are lucky that Paulson has such great talent at hand who are interested in serving. Yet, it is unclear that a group of investment bankers from one powerhouse can provide the needed perspectives to create the best solutions.

The French and the British had the varied talent pool that they needed and moved much more quickly and effectively than the Americans. And our anti-government nationalization (quick, is that a new oxymoron?) of the banks will not be as effective. The Europoeans have taken voting stock in the banks that they have nationalized and can get the banks to start lending instead of hoarding capital. Half-measures with the banks, i.e., ownership without representation, will not be enough, unless we get lucky or the European's cure paves our way.

Obama/Biden: When Hope and History Rhyme

Senator Biden made a moving speech today at a fundraiser in Atherton. In closing, he quoted Seamus Heaney's poem:

History says, Don't hope
On this side of the grave,
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up
And hope and history rhyme.

This is our moment. Just by electing Barack Obama, we progress in our dreams for the future.

Barack's Pitch Perfect Performance in the Final Debate

In last night's debate, Barack Obama reached new heights in leadership. He let go of the Democratic disease of needing to be right at all costs. He stopped correcting the record on each and every count.

It's an important leadership discipline because defending oneself often feels pedantic, causes the speaker to lose energy and compromises the ability to offer a broader vision. Last night, Obama looked presidential by laying out his plans and only selectively and at times reluctantly responding to McCain's barbs. Barack only responded to the Ayers poke after McCain's second attempt and delivered his finest moment. After he explained his association with Ayers, he went on to name his real advisors, including Richard Lugar. It was a touchdown moment.

By contrast, McCain looked frantic as he tried to bully Barack into defending himself. He looked like a has-been politician in a wrestling match, trying desperately to score points so that he might win a technical victory. For the first time, I felt nostalgia for the old McCain and excitement at having won a big game.

Obama was at the top of his game and this debate will be used often in teaching skills on debate, tough questioning and leadership.

Speech on Race by Head of AFL-CIO in Support of Obama

I'm not usually moved by speeches which feature a lot of shouting. This one moved me and it's obvious why this video is racing around the blogosphere. Watch the head of the AFL-CIO as he makes his appeal about overcoming racism in the Presidential race. This will no doubt be remembered in years to come. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QIGJTHdH50.

What does Sarah Palin Represent Beyond Her Improv Genius?

I’m taking an Improv class and we’ve been doing work around status and how people achieve status by what they project physically and how other players endow each other with status. Sarah Palin has improvised herself onto the global stage by successfully being herself on a grand scale. She has achieved this status by sucking lots of helium. And many have embraced her new status enthusiastically. So far, hats off: more power to her. We all have much to learn and admire about this rise.

The problem is that Palin has not yet mastered the fundamental beliefs of her party. When asked which Supreme Court decision she disapproves of, she rightly zeroed in on Roe v. Wade. Fine so far. Then, she immediately said she believed in the right to privacy. God, I would love to have seen the looks on the faces of all the members of the Supreme Court, not to mention the Federalist Society. Yikes, the Republican Party has spent decades trying to dismantle the right to privacy and the entire branch of law built upon the 1965 landmark privacy case, Griswold v. Connecticut. And at the outset of the vice-presidential debate, she spoke of ramping up regulation to prevent another meltdown on Wall Street owing to greed and corrumption.

Even in the biggest of tents, these are not acceptable deviations from party orthodoxy. It might be nice to think we could have a national leader who pays no attention to party beliefs. Yet, she will be ceding her power to those around her as they whisper the basic truths to her. It reminds me of Dr. Evil asking for a ransom of $1 million dollars, only to learn that $100 billion would be more in line with the current financial reality. One cannot retain credibility with the Putins of the world with this lack of basic knowledge, even if she can see Putin across her maritime border.

How Much is that Jerk Costing Your Company?

We’ve all worked with someone who creates resentment and bad feelings at the office. Let’s call him Greg. Greg cuts people off in meetings if they don’t get to the point quickly enough and he micro-manages people to try to replicate the exact same result as if he had done the work himself. He thinks he’s being efficient and where would we all be without Greg’s enormous talents? Most likely, he is very well-intentioned. Funny, his team members are miserable and they hide it. I should know. I used to be Greg.

Let’s think about how much the Gregs of the world cost companies in cash. It costs Pizza Hut $2,400 to lose an hourly delivery-man: imagine the cost of losing a highly trained professional. In Bradford Smart’s book ”Topgrading: How Leading Companies Win by Hiring, Coaching, and Keeping the Best People”, the cost of a mis-hire is 28 times the salary for a person who earns between $100,000 and $250,000. If Greg earns $150,000 and is not performing due to the lack of strong leadership skills, by this calculation, this costs the company over $4 million. And think of the cost of that associate that just left because he couldn’t take Greg.

I hear Greg’s story with varied details all the time. There’s plenty of misery out there and many misguided attempts to correct it. The good news is that complete turnarounds are possible if the leader is open-minded and committed to fixing the problem. Again, I should know. Very quickly with the right assessment and skill-building, my team knew I was serious about change and we moved toward greatly improved team performance in 2 weeks and I continued to rebuild the team over the subsequent year.