1950s officeI’m so throughly disappointed and disheartened reading the news about Yahoo’s CEO Marissa Mayer’s new policy forcing all employees to be present in the office.  If you haven’t already seen the story, Mayer, in the spirit of collaboration and, in order to increase effectiveness, has mandated that all employees who currently work in a remote capacity return to the office.

Huh?  It’s 2013.  I thought we had long since moved past the discussion about the need to be present in the office (for most employees) and were actually looking at strategies to create more flexibility for a multitude of reasons including cost-effectiveness for the corporation, improved productivity for the employee and, most importantly, increased retention.  Win-win all the way around.  At a time when more and more companies are looking at innovative ways to distribute the workforce and create better opportunities for attracting top talent, achieving strong results and creating a culture that recognizes and respects the need for some type of work/life integration, it is seemingly absurd that Yahoo’s new CEO is taking a 180 degree turn and returning to an archaic workplace style.

Every bit of research that has surfaced in the last several years has indicated that more flexibility is not just a perk but, in fact, a requirement in order to take your business to the next level.  Millennials and boomers – the largest populations currently in the workforce – are demanding it.  Boomers are not willingly fading off into the sunset like many of their predecessors did.  Longer life expectancy and weak retirement accounts have contributed to the need and opportunity to have this enormous wealth of talent and knowledge hang around a little bit longer.  The ability to transfer knowledge to the incoming workforce – who also have their own ideas about how work should happen – is invaluable.  Rather than gold watches and retirement parties, organizations have the good fortune of creating new work solutions for these vital contributors to allow them to begin to reclaim their lives a little bit and still play an important role in helping push business forward.  Millennials have made their voices heard.  Many choose flexibility over cash and most will tell you that they will stick around longer if they have the ability to abandon the 9 to 5 construct.  They want the opportunity to work whenever, wherever, however – as long as they are producing results.  And companies are jumping all over this as they are finally figuring out that results-driven management is the true path to success.  No one has been able to prove that being present increases productivity, innovation or results.  However, happy and fulfilled employees always proves to yield better results.

Mayer joined Yahoo last summer while five months pregnant.  Any other Generation Xers like me will tell you that the notion of a woman being selected to run an Internet giant four months before giving birth to her first child is outlandish.  It is noteworthy enough that a 37-year-old woman would be tapped for such a role but, the fact that she was also about to become a mother, made the decision and appointment groundbreaking.  And, for those of us who rally every day to create a world where women can have such opportunities, the announcement from Yahoo allowed us to give a collective cheer and imagine, if only briefly, about the seismic shift that might have just occurred.  But then Mayer chose to take a 2-week maternity leave.  OK, she is a new CEO and probably could pull off getting back to work with the help of caregivers and a good flexible schedule.  She was about to become our flexibility icon!  And then, only months after returning to work, Mayer, with a straight face and clearly a lot of conviction, announced that flexibility was no longer on the table at Yahoo.

If Mayer were the newly appointed CEO of a large financial services firm or even an old, stodgy law firm, I could almost appreciate the culture that she was working in and acknowledge the pressure she might be under.  However, Mayer is at the helm of an innovative, young technology firm, headquartered in a town where flexibility is ingrained in the culture.  Granted, Silicon Valley is riddled with campuses that try to lure employees into never leaving the office with endless arrays of concierge services and free gourmet food.  However, these companies also outfit their employees with the latest technology to enable them to be truly mobile, ensuring that nothing will stand in the way of productivity.  In this environment, the notion of insisting that, in order to “become the absolute best place to work, communication and collaboration will be important, so we need to be working side-by-side”, is absurd.

There is no argument that there is tremendous value in human interaction rather than ongoing virtual connections.  When teams come together and work alongside one another, they produce great results.  However, we must balance this with the importance of individual work time, broad-ranging work styles (not everyone is an extrovert) and the need to be able to juggle all the various aspects of your life.  The availability of technology today allows for work to happen in ways that would have never been possible even 20 years ago and affords us the benefit of being more innovative in our thinking about how work happens.  If Mayer was really looking to create more innovation within her workplace then the decision should have been to empower managers to develop strategies within their teams to create dynamic work environments that accommodated the various needs and styles of the team members.  If Yahoo employees were taking advantage of flexibility and not being productive, this should have been addressed on an individual basis.  A wholesale move away from flexibility and remote work is not the answer here.

For the past decade, a big part of my work has been focused on helping companies make the shift to more agile work where employees and managers can learn how to better communicate, be more effective and shift the workplace dynamics.  I am sure Marissa Mayer believes that her new approach is the right strategy for Yahoo’s 14,000 employees located all over the globe but, given the inertia resulting from the shift towards more flexible workplaces, it is a giant step backwards.  A step that will, undoubtedly, be watched closely and, probably be used as the case study for why flexibility and workplace agility is so critical in the new era of work.  The war for talent is alive and well – especially in the high-tech sector – and employees at Yahoo will show their displeasure with this controversial move by talking with their feet.  Undoubtedly, productivity will fall and attrition rates will rise.  If the days of workplace flexibility are ancient history for Yahoo then the days of replying to emails on nights and weekends and being “on” all the time – a tradeoff for that freedom – is sure to become a thing of the past as well.

It’s an unfortunate moment in time for the movement towards more agile and dynamic workplaces but, without a doubt, it is a moment that will leave an indelible mark on the future of work.


“I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels.
Life’s a bitch.  You’ve got to go out and kick ass.” – Maya Angelou

Here’s the deal. I am getting more and more frustrated when it comes to talking about equity for women in the workplace.  The statistics are not improving, women are opting out more than ever before and I have to wonder if there is a real solution to the increasing challenges women face in terms in having equity in the workplace.

For years I have been studying this topic.  Back in the early 2000s when I worked at Working Mother Media, we looked at the topic from the lens of working mothers and struggled with the notion of workplace flexibility.  It’s disappointing and scary that nearly 10 years later we are having the very same conversations and nothing has improved.  I have to ask the question of why.

Yesterday, as I was partaking in my daily ritual of tweeting and catching up on all the current news I can absorb in 140 characters or less, I came across the youtube video of Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg’s 2010 TED talk on why we have so few women leaders in the world.  Coincidentally, on this same day, I came across on Facebook, courtesy of my friends at Flexpaths, a story from CNN about Sandberg admitting that she leaves work at 5:30pm.  Why is this news?  In my opinion, if it was about a male Fortune 500 CEO confessing that he slips out of the office early to spend time with his kids or attend their soccer games, that would be groundbreaking and would set a different tone, certainly in his workplace.  In reality, however, Sandberg telling her story is the equivalent of preaching to the choir.  Despite the fact that she is a powerful and busy COO, she is still a woman and it is expected that she would figure out a way to try to balance work and family.

Sandberg had some very clear views about what is holding women back and cited some interesting facts in her talk:

  • Out of 190 heads of state in the world, only 9 are women
  • Of all the Parliament members in the world, only 13% are women
  • Women represent only 20% of the leaders of nonprofit organizations (bucking the theory that nonprofits are a place where women can excel into leadership roles)

I’ll add to this my own stats:  Less than 3% of the Fortune 500 CEO’s are women.  (Although, curiously, of the 100 most successful companies in the world, 6% are run by women which makes me wonder if they are more successful because of the greater presence of women leaders….).  Women represent only 16% of equity partners in law firms and 16% of the seats in Congress.  16% has long been this magical number for women.  We seem to hover right there in terms of significant representation.  When we look at Board seats, the answer is 16% representation by women.  Let’s face it, this is all terrible news.  In the 10 years since I started tracking this data at Working Mother, nothing has changed.  Nothing at all.  Well, nothing except that the problem is getting worse because we are not making any headway.

Sandberg suggests that there are several critical issues that need to be addressed in order to change the reality for women in leadership.  First of all, we need to keep women in the workforce to ensure that they ultimately gain access to the high income jobs.  We know that women are opting out of the traditional workforce at higher rates than ever before.  Whether it be to stay at home and raise a family or to start their own businesses, women are not willing to play the game.  This exodus from corporate jobs creates a void of potential women leaders.  Of course, we should celebrate the fact that women feel empowered to change their career paths, take risks and become entrepreneurs but this fact is hurting our economy because there is no doubt that women leaders yield strong business results.  Without a rich talent pool to draw from, businesses suffer and lose the opportunity to both increase gender equity in the senior ranks as well as benefit from the strengths that women uniquely bring to the table.

Another challenge Sandberg identified as an obstacle for women is that they underestimate their own abilities.  This is one I can certainly relate to on a personal level as I am sure many women can.  It is very hard for women to promote themselves in the same way that men do.  Sandberg cited research that suggested that while men will frequently take credit for their own successes, women often attribute it to other influences or the fact that they got lucky.  In addition, women are less likely to negotiate for themselves when it comes to compensation which directly results in the gender disparity in pay.  It has been reported that 57% of men negotiated their first salaries compared to only 7% of women.  (I shared this stat with a group of women this morning and, after shaking their heads they agreed that this is very accurate.)  Sandberg attributes a lot of this to social influences because, as a society, there is certainly more pressure and expectation put on mean to succeed.  Stay-at-home dads are not always celebrated and working moms are often criticized.

Women are challenged with the likability factor, which is a key obstacle as well.  Success and likability are positively correlated for men while it is negatively correlated for women.  In other words, the more successful a women, the less likable we perceive her to be.  Sandberg cited one study that illustrates this phenomenon perfectly. In it, Columbia Biz School prof Frank Flynn and colleague Cameron Anderson at NYU offered their students a case study of a successful Silicon Valley venture capitalist named Heidi Roizen. But she was only called Heidi in the case study given to half their students; in the other, Heidi became Howard.

And guess what happened?

While the students rated Heidi and Howard equally competent, they liked Howard–but not Heidi. In fact, according to a synopsis of the study, students felt Heidi was significantly less likable and worthy of being hired than Howard. Why? Students saw Heidi as more “selfish” than Howard.

Is it any wonder we don’t want anyone calling us ambitious?

The final factor that Sandberg cited was that women often leave before they leave.  Ironically, the actions women take to try to stay in the workforce ultimately lead to them leaving.  For instance, if a woman is thinking about starting a family or is recently pregnant, she is likely to pass up opportunities for stretch assignments or promotions.  Recognizing that she will have to step aside for a period of time after the birth of the child, a woman tends to feel morally obligated to say no rather than take on the assignment or new role and deal with it when the baby is born.  As a result, between pregnancy, maternity leave and the ramp-up period after returning to work, women are often losing close to 2 years of opportunity for engagement and advancement in their careers as a result of building their families.  We are doing this to ourselves because we tend to lean back even when we are thinking about having a baby.  These rules need to change.

Overall, the most concerning part of Sandberg’s talk, for me, was her realization that this generation will never see equity in the workplace.  The divide is still so great and we simply do not have the time or the numbers to make up the difference.  It is up to the young women – and men- who are just now entering the workforce to change the game.  And it is up to today’s leaders to be open to look at the problem differently.  Women are always going to have babies and, even though we know that only 1/3 of executive women have children compared to 2/3 of executive men, that is not going to change.  In fact, we know that millennials are even more interested in having families and want to do so at a younger age. They reject the idea that women need to establish themselves before they can start a family.  Perhaps the corporate culture will change their thinking about that but I hope the millennial women – a sizable force to be reckoned with – will buck the system and prove that career and family are not mutually exclusive for women or men.

And, most importantly, it is time for the guys to have a voice in this revolution.  The men are still in charge and have the power.  By becoming role models for how we look at work and making sure to support women as they climb the corporate ladder and navigate the challenging terrain of carrying on the human race while also helping to keep the economy afloat, men are perhaps the secret sauce.  We often keep them out of this conversation as if they are our mortal enemies but, perhaps, they are the allies we have forgotten to embrace.

I am going to keep pining over this issue and will keep getting on my soapbox about it and, hopefully before my voice gets too old, I will see some real movement in these numbers.  In the meantime, we will continue to develop programs to support women and the men that can change their fate.  Stay tuned for some cool new programs coming from Ingenium Strategies to help build our future women leaders!