In my second job out of college, my boss’ boss would often say, “Wherever you go there’s always a problem and the problem is always the people.” I wondered to myself, “Yeah, but which people?”

In my previous post in this series, I recounted how reading Sheryl Sandberg’s book, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead, reminded me of my grandfather refusing to let my grandmother pursue her master’s degree because he didn’t want her to have more formal education than he did; a sad example of a woman wanting to lean in to her career and a man not just failing to support her through passivity, but actively preventing her from achieving more.

Sandberg tells us she wrote the book

“to encourage women to dream big, forge a path through the obstacles, and achieve their full potential. I am hoping that each woman will set her own goals and reach for them with gusto. And I am hoping that each man will do his part to support women in the workplace and in the home with gusto. As we start using the talents of the entire population, our institutions will be more productive, our homes will be happier, and the children growing up in those homes will no longer be held back by narrow stereotypes.” (Sandbrerg, 2013, p. 171)

I mostly agree with Sandberg. There is some daylight between us around the heteronormativity of the statement, but in general, I agree that we should encourage and support women to reach their full potential. I want the same for anyone regardless of their gender or where they fall on the spectrum of biological sex. I think any good natured, rational person should want any other person to achieve their full potential.

Women make up 50 percent of the population, yet they currently hold 10 percent of Fortune 500 CEO positions and that’s a record high (Fortune, Hinchliffe). Kunal Modi, cited in my previous post points out that women make up only 17 percent of the U.S. Congress and 16 percent of C-suites. (Huffington Post, Modi)

“Women earn 57 percent of undergraduate degrees and account for nearly 60 percent of all graduate school enrollment. However, in the disciplines that continue to define America’s economic future — engineering, computer science, mathematics, and physical sciences — women earn less than half of all degrees.” (Huffington Post, Modi)

There’s debate about the cause of these disparities. Recall the 10 page document authored by James Damore, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” where Damore presented evidence that biological differences between men and women may explain these disparities. As with so much of social science, here, the science is unsettled. (Wired, Molteni)

Damore’s memo cites studies that show “men systematize, women empathize” and that this may be the reason for women’s underrepresentation in technical or leadership roles rather than active discrimination. Yet even in high empathy roles like human resources where “76% of HR Managers are women, male HR Managers earn 40% more than their female counterparts.” (Visier, Barron) Read that again. If it’s not active discrimination, there are egregious sins of omission resulting in this pay gap. 

Given these facts, it’s hard to believe anyone would argue in good faith that women are realizing their full potential. 

If we accept that there’s a problem, what is the cause? My old boss’ boss would say it’s the people. Sure, but which people? Why are women underrepresented in leadership and how do we fix it? Sandberg has much to say on this and I’ll dive into it in my next post. 

Until then, I’m taking inspiration from Beyoncé’s going hard and slaying all day, maybe you will too.

*** This is a Security Bloggers Network syndicated blog from trustedsignal -- blog authored by davehull. Read the original post at: https://trustedsignal.blogspot.com/2024/02/the-problem-is-people-but-which-people.html