Lean In Part 13

33. Human Rights Watch, Failing Its Families: Lack of Paid Leave and Work-Family Supports in the US (February 2011), http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us0211webwcover.pdf.

34. Ellen Bravo, " 'Having It All?'-The Wrong Question for Most Women," Women's Media Center, June 26, 2012, http://www.womensmediacenter.com/feature/entry/having-it-allthe-wrong-question-for-most-women.

35. Sharon Meers and Joanna Strober, Getting to 50/50: How Working Couples Can Have It All by Sharing It All (New York: Bantam Books, 2009).

36. Rosalind Chait Barnett, "Women and Multiple Roles: Myths and Reality," Harvard Review of Psychology 12, no. 3 (2004): 15864; Rosalind Chait Barnett and Janet s.h.i.+bley Hyde, "Women, Men, Work, and Family: An Expansionist Theory," American Psychologist 56, no. 10 (2001): 78196; and Rosalind Chait Barnett and Caryl Rivers, She Works/He Works: How Two-Income Families Are Happy, Healthy, and Thriving (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998).

37. Cheryl Buehler and Marion O'Brian, "Mothers' Part-Time Employment: a.s.sociations with Mother and Family Well-Being," Journal of Family Psychology 25, no. 6 (2011): 895906; Rebekah Coley et al., "Maternal Functioning, Time, Money: The World of Work and Welfare," Children and Youth Services Review 29, no. 6 (2007): 72141; Leslie Bennetts, The Feminine Mistake: Are We Giving Up Too Much? (New York: Hyperion, 2007); Lynne P. Cook, " 'Doing' Gender in Context: Household Bargaining and the Risk of Divorce in Germany and the United States," American Journal of Sociology 112, no. 2 (2006): 44272; and Barnett, "Women and Multiple Roles," 15864.

38. This phrase was first used by Spencer Johnson in his 1998 book, Who Moved My Cheese?. See Spencer Johnson, Who Moved My Cheese? An Amazing Way to Deal with Change in Your Work and in Your Life (New York: Putnam, 1998), 48.

2. SIT AT THE TABLE

1. Peggy McIntosh, "Feeling Like a Fraud," Wellesley Centers for Women working paper no. 18 (Wellesley, MA: Stone Centers Publications, 1985).

2. Early research on the impostor syndrome in the late 1970s suggested it was more prevalent among high-achieving women. Subsequent studies in the 1980s and 1990s were equivocal, with some studies agreeing and others finding that men were sometimes vulnerable to these kinds of fears too, at comparable rates. Recently, studies that focused on college students, doctoral students, and family medicine residents have again found the syndrome to be more prevalent among women than men. Most research and discussion about the impostor syndrome argues that women are more limited by it because they experience it more frequently and with more intensity than do men. For a discussion, see Gina Gibson-Beverly and Jonathan P. Schwartz, "Attachment, Ent.i.tlement, and the Impostor Phenomenon in Female Graduate Students," Journal of College Counseling 11, no. 2 (2008): 12021; and Shamala k.u.mar and Carolyn M. Jagacinski, "Imposters Have Goals Too: The Imposter Phenomenon and Its Relations.h.i.+p to Achievement Goal Theory," Personality and Individual Differences 40, no. 1 (2006): 149. For other recent studies, see Gregor Jostl et al., "When Will They Blow My Cover? The Impostor Phenomenon Among Austrian Doctoral Students," Zeitschrift fur Psychologie 220, no. 2 (2012): 10920; Loretta Neal McGregor, Damon E. Gee, and K. Elizabeth Posey, "I Feel Like a Fraud and It Depresses Me: The Relation Between the Imposter Phenomenon and Depression," Social Behavior and Personality 36, no. 1 (2008): 4348; and Kathy Oriel, Mary Beth Plane, and Marlon Mundt, "Family Medicine Residents and the Impostor Phenomenon," Family Medicine 36, no. 4 (2004): 24852. For the original study, see Pauline Rose Clance and Suzanne Ament Imes, "The Impostor Phenomenon in High Achieving Women: Dynamics and Therapeutic Intervention," Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice 15, no. 3 (1978): 24147.

3. "Tina Fey-From Spoofer to Movie Stardom," The Independent, March 19, 2010, http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/tina-fey--from-spoofer-to-movie-stardom-1923552.html.

4. S. Scott Lind et al., "Competency-Based Student Self-a.s.sessment on a Surgery Rotation," Journal of Surgical Research 105, no. 1 (2002): 3134.

5. Jennifer L. Lawless and Richard L. Fox, Men Rule: The Continued Under-Representation of Women in U.S. Politics (Was.h.i.+ngton, D.C.: Women & Politics Inst.i.tute, American University School of Public Affairs, January 2012), http://www.american.edu/spa/wpi/upload/2012-Men-Rule-Report-final-web.pdf.

6. Working Group on Student Experiences, Study on Women's Experiences at Harvard Law School (Cambridge, MA: Working Group on Student Experiences, February 2004), http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/experiences/FullReport.pdf. A higher percentage of male law students than female law students ranked themselves in the top quintile of their cla.s.s in the following categories: legal reasoning (33% vs. 15%), quant.i.tative reasoning (40% vs. 11%), quick on feet (28% vs. 17%), brief writing (23% vs. 18%), oral argument (24% vs. 13%), research (20% vs. 11%), building consensus (27% vs. 21%), and persuading others (20% vs. 12%). In only one skill, ethical issues, did a slightly higher percentage of female students (26%) than male students (25%) rank themselves in the top quintile of their cla.s.s.

7. For studies on how women estimate their abilities in front of others, see Kimberly A. Daubman, Laurie Heatherington, and Alicia Ahn, "Gender and the Self-Presentation of Academic Achievement," s.e.x Roles 27, nos. 34 (1992): 187204; Laurie Heatherington et al., "Two Investigations of 'Female Modesty' in Achievement Situations," s.e.x Roles 29, nos. 1112 (1993): 73954; and Laurie Heatherington, Laura S. Townsend, and David P. Burroughs, " 'How'd You Do on That Test?' The Effects of Gender on Self-Presentation of Achievement to Vulnerable Men," s.e.x Roles 45, nos. 34 (2001): 16177. For a review and a.n.a.lysis of how women judge themselves on masculine tasks, see Sylvia Beyer, "The Effects of Gender, Dysphoria, and Performance Feedback on the Accuracy of Self-Evaluations," s.e.x Roles 47, nos. 910 (2002): 45364.

8. Sylvia Beyer, "Gender Differences in Causal Attributions by College Students of Performance on Course Examinations," Current Psychology 17, no. 4 (1998): 34658. Research has doc.u.mented the tendency for girls and women to underestimate their skills, abilities, and performance relative to boys and men, especially in regard to masculine tasks. Yet depending on the specific methodology used, some studies have found that women give more accurate appraisals of their performance, while men overestimate their performance. Several explanations have been advanced to explain why women tend to lower their self-a.s.sessments, including low self-confidence; "feminine modesty," which holds that to act in accordance with gender role stereotypes and/or to avoid the negative consequences of female immodesty, girls and women present themselves in a more humble manner; and concern with protecting the self-esteem of others. From this relational perspective, women want to preserve a sense of equality and compatibility in their personal relations.h.i.+ps, and thus they lower their self-a.s.sessments so as to avoid being perceived as bragging or to avoid making someone else, who may have performed worse, feel badly. The gender of the person to whom women make a self-a.s.sessment has sometimes been found to affect the degree to which they underestimate themselves, with some evidence finding that women lower their self-a.s.sessments in the presence of vulnerable male partners, for example by lowering estimates of their GPA in front of a male partner who is worried about his grades. However, studies on this specific topic are inconsistent. For a review of these explanations, see Heatherington, Townsend, and Burroughs, " 'How'd You Do on That Test?,' " 16177; and Laurie Heatherington, Andrea B. Burns, and Timothy B. Gustafson, "When Another Stumbles: Gender and Self-Presentation to Vulnerable Others," s.e.x Roles 38, nos. 1112 (1998): 889913.

9. Tomi-Ann Roberts and Susan Nolan-Hoeksema, "s.e.x Differences in Reactions to Evaluative Feedback," s.e.x Roles 21, nos. 1112 (December 1989): 72547; and Maria Johnson and Vicki S. Helgeson, "s.e.x Differences in Response to Evaluative Feedback: A Field Study," Psychology of Women Quarterly 26, no. 3 (2002): 24251.

10. Sylvia Beyer, "Gender Differences in Causal Attributions by College Students of Performance on Course Examinations," Current Psychology 17, no. 4 (1998): 354. For a review of consequences from negative self-evaluation, including depression and lower aspirations, see Sylvia Beyer and Edward M. Bowden, "Gender Differences in Self-Perception: Convergent Evidence from Three Measures of Accuracy and Bias," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23, no. 2 (1997): 169.

11. Nicole Perlroth and Claire Cain Miller, "The $1.6 Billion Woman, Staying on Message," New York Times, February 4, 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/business/sheryl-sandberg-of-facebook-staying-on-message.html?pagewanted=all.

12. Dana R. Carney, Amy J. C. Cuddy, and Andy J. Yap, "Power Posing: Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance," Psychological Science 21, no. 10 (2010): 136368.

13. Bianca Bosker, "Cisco Tech Chief Outlines the Advantages of Being a Woman in Tech," The Huffington Post, October 27, 2011, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/27/cisco-chief-technology-officer-woman-in-tech_n_1035880.html.

14. Claire Cain Miller, "For Incoming I.B.M. Chief, Self-Confidence Is Rewarded, New York Times, October 27, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/business/for-incoming-ibm-chief-self-confidence-rewarded.html.

15. Caroline Howard, "The World's 100 Most Powerful Women: This Year It's All About Reach," Forbes, August 24, 2011, http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinehoward/2011/08/24/the-worlds-100-most-powerful-women-this-year-its-all-about-reach/.

3. SUCCESS AND LIKEABILITY

1. A description and a.n.a.lysis of the study were provided by Professor Frank J. Flynn in discussion with the author, June 22, 2011.

2. To read the case study, see Kathleen McGinn and Nicole Tempest, Heidi Roizen, Harvard Business School Case Study #9800228 (Boston: Harvard Business School Publis.h.i.+ng, 2009).

3. Madeline E. Heilman and Tyler G. Okimoto, "Why Are Women Penalized for Success at Male Tasks?: The Implied Communality Deficit," Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 1 (2007): 8192; Madeline E. Heilman et al., "Penalties for Success: Reactions to Women Who Succeed at Male Gender-Typed Tasks," Journal of Applied Psychology 89, no. 3 (2004): 41627; and Madeline E. Heilman, Caryn J. Block, and Richard F. Martell, "s.e.x Stereotypes: Do They Influence Perceptions of Managers?" Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 10, no. 6 (1995): 23752. For helpful reviews of relevant issues, see Alice H. Eagly and Steven J. Karau, "Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice Toward Female Leaders," Psychological Review 109, no. 3 (2002): 57398; Madeline E. Heilman, "Description and Prescription: How Gender Stereotypes Prevent Women's Ascent up the Organizational Ladder," Journal of Social Issues 57, no. 4 (2001): 65774; and Cecilia L. Ridgeway, "Gender, Status, and Leaders.h.i.+p," Journal of Social Issues 57, no. 4 (2001): 63755. It should be noted that successful women pay a likeability penalty specifically in arenas considered to be male domains.

4. Cyndi Kernahan, Bruce D. Bartholow, and B. Ann Bettencourt, "Effects of Category-Based Expectancy Violation on Affect-Related Evaluations: Toward a Comprehensive Model," Basic and Applied Social Psychology 22, no. 2 (2000): 85100; and B. Ann Bettencourt et al., "Evaluations of Ingroup and Outgroup Members: The Role of Category-Based Expectancy Violation," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 33, no. 3 (1997): 24475. Research on this topic, known as "expectancy theory," finds that we tend to evaluate people based upon stereotypes about the groups to which they belong. When people act in ways that violate our preconceived expectations, we take notice and evaluate them more extremely and intensely than we would otherwise.

5. Shankar Vedantam, " 'Nicer s.e.x' Image at Play in Politics," Chicago Tribune, November 13, 2007, http://articles.chicagotribune.com/20071113/news/0711120690_1_female-leaders-women-and-leaders.h.i.+p-social-psychologist.

6. Ken Auletta, "A Woman's Place: Can Sheryl Sandberg Upend Silicon Valley's Male-Dominated Culture?," The New Yorker, July 11, 2012, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/07/11/110711fa_fact_auletta?currentPage=all.

7. Professor Deborah H. Gruenfeld, discussion with the author, June 22, 2012.

8. A study by Madeline E. Heilman et al. (2004) found that among competent employees, those who were less liked received fewer organizational reward recommendations (such as getting put on the fast track, salary increases) than employees who were liked. See Heilman et al., "Penalties for Success," 41627.

9. Laurie A. Rudman, "Self-Promotion as a Risk Factor for Women: The Costs and Benefits of Counterstereotypical Impression Management," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74, no. 3 (1998): 62945; Laurie A. Rudman and Peter Glick, "Feminized Management and Backlash Toward Agentic Women: The Hidden Costs to Women of a Kinder, Gentler Image of Middle Managers," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77, no. 5 (1999): 100410; and Laurie A. Rudman and Peter Glick, "Prescriptive Gender Stereotypes and Backlash Toward Agentic Women," Journal of Social Issues 57, no. 4 (2001): 74362.

10. Professor Francis J. Flynn, discussion with the author, June 22, 2011.

11. Madeline E. Heilman and Julie J. Chen, "Same Behavior, Different Consequences: Reactions to Men's and Women's Altruistic Citizens.h.i.+p Behaviors," Journal of Applied Psychology 90, no. 3 (2005): 43141.

12. Catalyst, The Double-Bind Dilemma for Women in Leaders.h.i.+p: d.a.m.ned if You Do, Doomed if You Don't (July 2007), 1, http://www.catalyst.org/file/45/the%20double-bind%20dilemma%20for%20women%20in%20leaders.h.i.+p%20d.a.m.ned%20if%20you%20do,%20doomed%20if%20you%20don%E2%80%99t.pdf.

13. Linda Babc.o.c.k and Sara Laschever, Women Don't Ask (New York: Bantam Books, 2007), 14; Linda Babc.o.c.k et al., "Gender Differences in the Propensity to Initiate Negotiations," in Social Psychology and Economics, ed. David De Cremer, Marcel Zeelenberg, and J. Keith Murnighan (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2006), 23959; and Fiona Greig, "Propensity to Negotiate and Career Advancement: Evidence from an Investment Bank That Women Are on a 'Slow Elevator,' " Negotiation Journal 24, no. 4 (2008): 495508. In general, studies find that men negotiate more than women and tend to reap more rewards from their efforts. However, these trends depend on the context in which the negotiation occurs. Small et al. (2007) found that the gender difference in initiating a negotiation disappears if the situation is characterized as an opportunity to "ask" as opposed to an opportunity to "negotiate." And Bowles et al. (2005) found that women's performance dramatically improves if they are negotiating for others and not for themselves. See Deborah A. Small et al., "Who Goes to the Bargaining Table? The Influence of Gender and Framing on the Initiation of Negotiation," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93, no. 4 (2007): 600613; and Hannah Riley Bowles et al., "Constraints and Triggers: Situational Mechanics of Gender in Negotiation," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89, no. 6 (2005): 95165.

14. Babc.o.c.k and Laschever, Women Don't Ask, 12.

15. Emily T. Amanatullah and Catherine H. Tinsley, "Punis.h.i.+ng Female Negotiators for a.s.serting Too Much ... or Not Enough: Exploring Why Advocacy Moderates Backlash Against a.s.sertive Female Negotiators," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 120, no. 1 (2013): 11022; and Hannah Riley Bowles, Linda Babc.o.c.k, and Lei Lai, "Social Incentives for Gender Differences in the Propensity to Initiate Negotiations: Sometimes It Does Hurt to Ask," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 103, no. 1 (2007): 84103.

16. Emily T. Amanatullah and Michael W. Morris, "Negotiating Gender Roles: Gender Differences in a.s.sertive Negotiating Are Mediated by Women's Fear of Backlash and Attenuated When Negotiating on Behalf of Others," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98, no. 2 (2010): 25667; and Bowles et al., "Constraints and Triggers," 95165.

17. Bowles, Babc.o.c.k, and Lai, "Social Incentives for Gender Differences," 84103.

18. Hannah Riley Bowles and Linda Babc.o.c.k, "How Can Women Escape the Compensation Negotiation Dilemma? Relational Accounts Are One Answer," Psychology of Women Quarterly, article in press (2012), 2, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0361684312455524.

19. Ibid., 117.

20. Cecilia L. Ridgeway, "Status in Groups: The Importance of Motivation," American Sociological Review 47, no. 1 (1982): 7688. In male group situations, women were found to be more influential when they made group-oriented statements (for example, "I think it's important that we cooperate").

21. Bowles and Babc.o.c.k, "How Can Women Escape the Compensation Negotiation Dilemma?" 117.

22. Linda Babc.o.c.k and Sara Laschever, Ask for It: How Women Can Use the Power of Negotiation to Get What They Really Want (New York: Bantam Dell, 2008), 253.