Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: Sheryl Sandberg

sheryl-sandberg

By Lilli DeBode, guest blogger, senior at Kent Place School

Almost a month ago, COO of Facebook, Sheryl Sandberg, released her book “Lean in—Women, Work, and the will to lead.” In the past few weeks the author has received a lot of criticism; some say her book encourages women to change as opposed to encouraging society as a whole to change. Others say that her book only applies to a small group of elite women and her suggestions are simply unrealistic for the typical American woman. I say yes, her suggestions do focus on a very specific demographic of women, but they are extremely noteworthy and should be taken seriously.

In 2010 Sandberg gave a famous TED Talk on the [lack of] progress of women in the workforce. This video has been watched over two million times, and in just 15 minutes provides her female viewers with her three simple suggestions on how to achieve success in the workplace.

Her first point: “Sit at the Table.” Sandberg says that women systematically underestimate themselves while men often overestimate themselves. This is one of the key reasons there aren’t as many women as men in top corporate positions. When women are successful they attribute it to help from others, luck, or hard work. In addition, Sandberg brings up a study showing the salaries of Carnegie Mellon MBA graduates. In the study, women’s starting salaries were almost $4,000 less than those of their male peers. Why is this? Because only 7% of the women negotiated their salaries while 57% of the men asked for more money. Sandberg sums it up perfectly: “No one gets the promotion they don’t think they deserve.”

Her second point is very simple: “Make your partner a real partner.” In order for women to be successful in the workplace they need their partners to help out at home. Right now, full-time working women do twice as much housework and three times as much childcare as their male partners do.  The ratio needs to be 50:50 if women are to have a shot at those promotions.

Finally her last point: “Don’t leave before you leave.” After interacting with many young women, Sandberg recognized a trend that is causing them to lower their aspirations. She found that long before they even have husbands, many young women start to minimize their career ambitions in preparation for the day that they have to leave to workforce to take care of their children. As a result, women pass up exciting career opportunities, thus making the idea of returning to work once they actually have children less appealing. In order to combat this premature settling, Sandberg urges young women to “Keep your foot on the gas pedal until the very day you need to leave.”

Sources and Resources: Watch Sandberg’s TED talk here. To learn more about her lecture, read this article from The Atlantic. To learn more about the Carnegie Mellon study she sited, click here.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

The Surprising Glass Ceiling in Sweden and France

What happens to a woman’s career trajectory when her job is family-friendly? The results have not been what policy makers expected.

In their work lives, Swedish women receive generous paid maternity leave and and can opt for flexible work hours. Politically, the Swedish Parliament has gender balance as do 2 major Swedish political parties’ electoral slates. In France, 17 of President Hollande’s 34 cabinet ministers are female and the French Constitution was amended in 2010 to mandate corporate and public gender equality. In France, Sweden and across the EU, there is a commitment to end gender inequality.

And yet, in France and Sweden, in private industry, men are in charge. Among France’s 87 universities, only 8 presidents are female. In large French law firms, a vast minority of the partners are female. Even when their boards implement gender balance quotas, large corporations have few, if any, females CEOs.

Social scientists are not sure why women are not rising to the top when the work world has made it easier to combine work and family. One theory is children. When labor force participation enables women to divide their time and energy between work and the family, they select the balance. As a result, many do not become the professional alpha women who can compete against committed males who rise to the top.

Monday Gender Issues Posts


Sources and Resources: This excellent discussion of “The Plight of the Alpha Female” appeared recently in the City Journal while this paper, “Is There a Glass Ceiling in Sweden?” presents details on the the surprising results of the Swedish family-friendly work environment. Also, you might want to look at an avalanche of gender stats and ideas in this most recent 300+ page OECD report, “Closing the Gender Gap.”

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Unless We Look More Closely at Women in the Global Labor Force, We See Only the Tip of the Iceberg.

Telling us that, “Women Still Can’t Have it All,” Princeton professor Anne-Marie Slaughter explains why she left her position as policy planning director for the State Department. In addition to her 24/7 job in Washington DC, she was a mother, a wife, and a weekend commuter to her Princeton NJ home. Nearing the 2-year mark when she would have lost tenure, she decided to return to Princeton to full time teaching, writing and speaking engagements. In her Atlantic article she says she was most concerned that she had not been the parent her adolescent son needed. In an excellent 6 page discussion, she says that for women to come even close to “having it all,” society has to change.

And that is where I started thinking about opportunity cost–the next best alternative that a decision requires you to sacrifice.

Here is how I got there:

I read the Slaughter article after contemplating a new US Department of Agriculture report that said the cost of parenting children up to the age of 17 is close to $300,000 for a middle income 2 parent family. Discussing the USDA report, the WSJ’s “numbers guy” added that the cost approaches $900,000 when you go to age 22. And yes, he does say that even then the expense is higher because forgone income and other hidden costs are not included.

At that point, I started to suspect that we were only looking at the tip of the cost iceberg. Yes, we all have the same categories of child-related dollar costs: housing, education, caregiving, food, health care, transportation, clothing.

But then, person specific opportunity cost takes over. For each of us, the parenting decision involves an array of career and personal choices. Each requires many sacrificed alternatives that may or may not have presented tough choices.

I wonder whether the changes Dr. Slaughter proposes will just take us to a new set of opportunity costs. How can we judge where the lowest cost for society and for different women lies, especially when the benefits–such as the maternal satisfaction, the happiness, maybe the old age care–differ for each of us?

Instead of talking about “having it all,” maybe we mean “having it more.” Because of opportunity cost, nobody ever “has it all.” Children will always be “expensive.”

Anne-Marie Slaughter explains her parenting costs and concerns in an Atlantic article that started a debate described by the NY Times. For the quantifiable costs of parenting, here are the USDA report and the WSJ article.

 

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment