Neither Seen Nor Heard


After plenty of hard work, Jennifer has been promoted to Vice President of Sales. Now, rather than meeting with clients and delivering results for them, she manages a staff of salespeople.

“The problem is,” she tells me, “whenever I have a meeting with my team it’s as if I don’t even exist. No one listens, people talk over one another and we’re starting to miss our projected sales numbers. What’s happening? I’ve always gotten along with these people really well, but it’s as if they hate me since I got promoted. What’s wrong with me?”

Getting promoted from within can be the best of times, and it can also be the worst of times. It’s the best when you know the organization and all the rules — written and unwritten — and can use this knowledge to succeed. It’s the worst when your former co-workers turn into surly, passed-over subordinates — and use all their time and attention conspiring to knock you down a peg.

To shift her situation, Jennifer needs to take a hard look at her own leadership style. There are three places for her to focus:

1. Attitude. I’ve written about the managerial differences between men and women — to recap, women are prone to “mend and tend” while men are more apt to “fight or flight”. Jennifer needs to take a hard look at how she behaves in meetings. Is she so overly collaborative (tending) that she fails to be authoritative? Does she run meetings like an executive, or defer to others in hopes of maintaining a good relationship (mending)? Authentic leadership is a balance of collaboration and authority — and Jennifer may be a little too heavy on the collaborative side of the scale. To tip the balance more toward center, she can take small steps toward being more decisive, such as setting the time and date for meetings, writing the agenda, and running meetings herself.

2. Verbal cues. Let me tell you this: If the boss doesn’t hold onto her own power, you can be sure that someone else (who is certain she should have been promoted to Jennifer’s spot) will grab it. Women in particular often use tentative language. Some women end every sentence with a literal or figurative question mark — which tells the listener that she’s not quite sure if she knows what she’s talking about. Jennifer can use a small tape recorder or enlist a mentor to figure out her verbal style. Listening to how she frames issues, sets goals and objectives, and deals with squabbling among her staff can be illuminating and empowering. Jennifer can use this information to choose different words — words that transmit that she’s knowledgeable, skilled and at the helm.

3. Body language. Similarly, Jennifer needs to understand her own body language. Is she hunching her shoulders and transmitting submission? Or clasping her hands under the table, which can indicate either that she is a dutiful little girl or has something to hide (and can’t be trusted). Leaders sit with attention, hands visible — and they take up space. Jennifer may need to do a little learning about body language so she can assume the command she’s been assigned.

One of the big stumbling blocks for women leaders is giving up the pernicious need to please. They wonder, “If I’m a straightforward leader, and claim my authority, will people still like me?” To be honest, some women worry about this whether they’re a Vice President of Sales, or organizing a neighborhood coffee klatsch.

The bottom line is this: how long are you going to please others at the expense of your own authentic self? Jennifer earned her promotion. She feels a great sense of satisfaction and accomplishment in her work. And she might be letting her need for the approval of others to hold her back from being her best possible self and completely owning her power.

When it comes down to it, women leaders — whether they’re leading a company or a group of teen volunteers or just leading themselves through their own personal growth — need to put their best possible self front and center. They need to own their power, however it comes to them, and exercise it authentically. When they do, they operate from a sense of inner peace, honesty and integrity. And the support and respect of others follows along quite naturally.

[Just a note to my guy readers: switch out all the girly references with dude stuff and you'll find it's equally true. Being an authentic person who exercises appropriate authority when it's called for -- that's how you lead effectively.]

What Is Love?


Nothing like a pop song to get to the heart of the matter. “What Is Love? (Baby Don’t Hurt Me!)” may not have been the top of the charts, but it had a good beat and you could dance to it.

Is that what love is, though? Love is just not getting hurt? Certainly that’s an implicit understanding in relationships — but don’t we also sing along with the equally catchy pop song with the chorus: “You only hurt the one you love”?

Many of you know that I am a big fan of the work of theologian Henri Nouwen. Recently I was reading his book Reaching Out. In it, Nouwen defines love as creating a safe place for another person to be fully themselves. What a thought! In this context, love is a gift you give with no promise of anything in return. And, no expectation of how a person must change to “win” your love. You remain an individual in a relationship, merely giving space to another individual in the same relationship.

Nouwen’s idea becomes very clear to me when I think about the love between a parent and a child. If my job as a loving parent is to make a safe place for my child to be fully herself, then I have to hear her opinions, tolerate both her purple hair and her messy room if that’s how my child expresses herself. This week.

In terms of romantic relationships, too, Nouwen’s definition has heft. To truly love someone, it’s imperative to let them be themselves. Not to ask them to change to meet your particular needs or your etched-in-stone expectations. If you have banked on marrying a guy with a fat wallet, are you really loving when you try to turn a poet into a corporate attorney? Or when you try to make a quiet, shy child into class president? Is that love?

If someone is destructive, reckless, negative or otherwise hurtful, the safest place for you might be to give the person an awful lot of room to be fully himself. Remember, our life’s mission is not to change or save someone — if their choices are destructive to us, we can lovingly step back and give them space.

In the seminal book The Art of Loving, psychologist Erich Fromm suggests that we are motivated by the anxiety caused by our inherent separateness as individualized human beings. Of course, this relates to our relationships with our mothers, as do most psychological theories. But don’t get me started on that. And how mothers are systematically eliminated from nearly all Disney films. That’s a whole other topic…

Back to the point. If our quest, as Fromm puts it, is to achieve union as a remedy to our anxious feelings of separateness, how do we find love as meaningful as in Nouwen’s definition? How do we manage the twin drives toward individuality and separateness?

Sometimes, frankly, we don’t manage them too well. For people who have unresolved issues around abandonment, or control, or separation from their parents, or personality disorders, or other blocks, the idea of being separate in an intimate relationship is scary and confusing. They may lack the tools to go within to resolve these problems, so they crave merger to salve their inner wounds. Aided by the popular culture which says, “Two Become One” (wasn’t that a Spice Girls song?), some people find it truly difficult to remain an individual in an intimate relationship. Experts say that it’s precisely this merger which threatens the health of our most intimate relationships.

So let’s reframe what relationships are supposed to be, shall we? Dr. Michael Gurian, who wrote What Could He Be Thinking?: How a Man’s Mind Really Works, is an expert on brain biology. Bottom line: men’s brains and women’s brains are constructed differently so we act differently. It may not be that the man hogs the remote because he’s a self-centered jerk — he may just be wired to be territorial. Women aren’t weak and silly just because they like talking about stuff — it may be just that she feels bonded when she does so.

If I make a safe place for you to be a guy, and you make a safe place for me to be a gal, what have we got? Dr. Gurian’s theory of “Intimate Separateness” holds that there is a natural ebb and flow between the male brain’s need for independence and the female brain’s need for closeness. Merely understanding this nature-based fact can allow couples the freedom to be individuals and to move naturally between the two states — distance and closeness — without either being “right” or “wrong”. This helps couples move away from destructive expectations of merger which can’t be met anywhere except on the silver screen.

To love is to give. To love is to give a safe place for another person to be fully themselves. With no thought to what you’re getting in return. It’s a gift. It’s so much more than romance. It’s bigger than a crush. Yet, it’s simply a gift. A gift that enlarges the lives of both the lover and the loved.

The Sacrifice of Veterans



Living in the Washington, DC area as I do, I’m surrounded by icons of our nation’s history. Nearly every day I cross the Potomac River and am greeted by the majestic Lincoln Memorial, with the Washington Monument obelisk just behind it, the stately Jefferson Memorial off to the right. Out of habit I look to the Capitol Dome — if it’s lit, I know that Congress is in session. The Iwo Jima Memorial is a favorite — my father’s apartment has overlooked it for at least twenty years — and each of the sculpted men straining to plant the flag is like an old friend.

Whenever I see these monuments I try not to take them for granted. I try to remember that I feel lucky and blessed to live in this country. Every once in a while, I am reminded that not all the monuments in this town are so easily seen.

A few years ago, I took my kids to lunch at a McDonald’s near their school. We pulled in and noticed a van unloading some young men in hospital scrubs. This being a big city, we didn’t pay too much attention. I did notice that the guys were young, scrubbed, with short haircuts — and giddy like kids.

It wasn’t until we were inside, in line, that I could read one of the young men’s t-shirt. It said: “Don’t touch me here — bullet hole.” And, “Please don’t hug me — broken rib!” He had circled areas and notes all over his front, and his back. All four of the young men had similar markings on their shirts, and pants.

That’s when I realized — these were wounded soldiers. Recovering soldiers. Not much older than my son. Happy as all get out to be away from Walter Reed Army Hospital for just a few minutes. Happy to just be standing there, ordinary guys, ordering a Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese and fries.

Just a few weeks ago, I was shopping for groceries and noticed a woman — model tall, polished ponytail, a little bit younger than me, Ingrid Bergman cheekbones. That alone would have caused me to notice her. But she was wearing a runner’s prosthesis on her right leg, and her left leg was pockmarked by small, healing wounds from her ankle to the hem of her runner’s shorts. Shrapnel wounds, I guessed. I weighed the idea that it could have been a car accident. But the way she carried herself? Like a soldier. That’s when I knew how she’d been hurt.

For a moment, I didn’t know how to manage my own feelings. I wanted to offer to push her cart because that wasn’t easy for her, or to pay for her groceries, or at least tell her I appreciated her sacrifice.

Because I haven’t sacrificed very much during this war, to be honest. Unlike my grandmother, I haven’t had to do without, save ration coupons, worry about loved ones serving. No, I’ve had it pretty easy.

And this woman in the grocery store — she lost that leg doing something I did not do. She served and she sacrificed. I followed her for a few minutes, wondering if I should say something, wondering if she wanted to talk about it. Wondering if calling attention to her would be the right thing or the wrong thing to do.

In the end, I did nothing. Nothing more than say a silent, grateful prayer for her and her family. With hopes that her external and internal wounds will heal.

On this Veteran’s Day, let’s remember the men and women of the past who have served our country since the Revolutionary War, but let’s take special note — and special care — of those who are serving today.

Their sacrifice is its own towering monument to our country. And for that, I am grateful.

Extreme Jobs


How many hours a week do you work? Do you travel? Do you supervise or mentor people? Are you required to be available to clients 24/7? Do you have to attend work-related events outside of regular work hours? Are there even such things as “regular work hours” where you work?

If you answered yes to these questions, then you might just have what Sylvia Ann Hewlett calls an “Extreme Job.” In her book Off-Ramps and On-Ramps: Keeping Talented Women on the Road to Success, Hewlett discusses the rise of extreme jobism as a barrier which keeps women from the executive suite, but also keeps men stressed and harried. It’s true, fewer women with children hold extreme jobs than do men — mainly because of the competing demands of work and family. Women who are also moms tend to step down, or away, from extreme jobs in an effort to find a balance in their lives.

Hewlett backs up her arguments with terrific research. In surveys, people in extreme jobs report the toll their work life takes on their health — “more than two thirds don’t get enough sleep, half don’t get enough exercise, and a significant number overeat, consume too much alcohol, or rely on medications to relieve insomnia or anxiety,” Hewlett finds.

But the biggest toll comes in the personal life of people with extreme jobs. Hewlett cites Arlie Hochschild’s book The Time Bind, and talks about the stress on a relationship when both people work long hours at demanding jobs. “Hochchild shows that for many professionals ‘home’ and ‘work’ have reversed roles: home is where you expect to find stress — and guilt; while work has become the ‘haven in a heartless world’ — the place where you get strokes and respect, a place where success is more predictable.”

Just about the same time I read Hewlett’s book, the Washington Post ran an article about workaholism. Serendipitous coincidence for me, because I was able to connect some dots. The Post article suggested workaholics take a look at relationships in the family, and ask, “Do you routinely get home after the kids are in bed? Miss important family events? Do you get impatient with family members because you have so much work to do?” The Post quotes Chris Essex from the Center for Work and the Family who says that some workaholics “choose to stay at work because family is harder work. They have skills and training that allow them to be successful at work, but they don’t have the skills and training to be successful at home.”

See a theme here?

It seems that sometimes people use the demands of their job as a barrier to real, deep connection with others. Busy single people can’t make plans with others; busy married people can’t make plans with their families. Which is one big, honking way to avoid connecting with people at all.

Kinda sad, isn’t it?

The rules and roles are well-defined at work — thus giving the control freak among us plenty of comfort. At home, however, the footing’s somewhat dicier, and harder to control. So, stay at work — in the comfort zone — or come home, where all bets are off.

If you recognize yourself in this paradigm, there are some things you can do to begin balancing your life and making deeper connections with your family and friends:

1) Start measuring yourself by a new yardstick. Rather than making your long hours and demanding schedule a “badge of honor”, define yourself in other ways — as a good parent, a good friend, a good squash player. So many times I’ve been in situations where one person talks about how demanding their job is only to have the next person “one-up” with how demanding their job is. If you find yourself in this kind of dueling banjos, just stop. De-escalate. You’ll be doing everyone a favor if you are a walking example of a happy, balanced life.

2) If you are the boss and you demand that your staff model your driven behavior, ask yourself if that’s really necessary. Do you have stressed-out people? Do you have people who are frequently ill? How’s morale? Do you have high turnover? Hewlett points out that it costs one and a half times a person’s salary to replace them — it costs more the higher in the organization you go. Workaholism, then, costs you more as a manager than it likely gets you. Change the group think, and you will get happier, more productive people who like what they do — and, as I’ve often found — will stay loyal to you and your organization.

3) Get some training. Go to a couples retreat, take some parenting classes or take up a hobby. In our workplaces we get leadership training, diversity training, computer training, ethics training, team building exercises and stress management classes. Why don’t we do this in our own homes? Make a “training schedule” for your non-work life, and build those skills which might be lacking. If you can find rewards from this kind of training — more sex, more happiness, more connection, more fun (just to name a few) — then the reward of an extreme job begins to pale in comparison. Believe me.

The bottom line is this: where you put your attention will grown more important in your life. If you put 120% of your attention on your work life, how much do you have for the rest of you? -80% is my guess. I’m not saying you can’t be successful. You can be. I’m not saying you can’t work hard. You can. The goal is balance. Work smart. Work efficient. Define yourself by your whole life, not just one part of it. It’s in that balance that life has the most meaning. And the most joy.

The Difference Between Men and Women


Isn’t the Internet a wonderful thing? You can read something interesting, then click to something else quite interesting, which leads, hours later, to an utterly random yet extremely fascinating article, completely unrelated to what got you started.

Using just this circuitous method, I stumbled on an interview with researcher Beverly Whipple, recently named one of the world’s 50 most influential living scientists by New Scientist magazine. Whipple, professor emeritus at Rutgers University, began her career as a nurse and switched to sex research 44 years ago when a patient asked if a man who had suffered a heart attack could ever have sex again. In the course of her career, she has answered that question and many others.

One line from the interview really jumped out at me. When asked the difference between men and women in terms of sex, Whipple replied, “Men are goal oriented, and women are pleasure oriented.”

Well, now. That makes a ton of sense, doesn’t it?

Then I wondered if there were other areas of life where this is true. Sure, some men are keen to experience, not just rush to a goal. And women are known to set and meet goals. But in the aggregate, the idea that men have one definition of success and women have another has implications in the boardroom, as well as the bedroom. As I pondered, I realized there are plenty of examples of this, especially if you exchange the word “pleasure” for “experience”.

Think about shopping. A man goes into a Shopping Situation with a seek-and-destroy mindset: “I need two new shirts, a tie and boxers, then I’m out of here!” Women may have things they need to pick up, but also look at the possibilities. “Sharon would like this!” or “This might work for Tom.” Women often shop with a friend, and make a day of it. They pay attention to ambiance, texture, sounds.

He has a goal. She’s after an experience.

Another example? The NCAA Final Four bracket chart. Can you think of another more goal-oriented deal than that? A guy will completely fill in the bracket and track the progress of the teams to the ultimate goal – the #1 position. On the other hand, when I watch college basketball I am fascinated by the stories, “Brent, the power forward, Lucas Jones, certainly has faced adversity. He was raised by his loving, asthmatic grandmother in Waukegon’s gritty inner city after he tragically lost his parents to a freak Zamboni incident at age 8. He’s a mentor to little kids at the Girls and Boys Club, a ventriloquist and a straight A student.” Ahhwww. Women are suckers for that stuff. It’s all part of the experience.

Women are color commentators, men are play-by-play.

So, where else does it matter that men are goal oriented and women are experience oriented? Let’s get back to sex. Many men, and plenty of women, feel that orgasm is the goal of sex. Some men feel that there must be “something wrong” if their partner doesn’t climax. Yet, I was surprised to learn from Professor Whipple that over 70% of women report they do not have orgasm every time they have intercourse. Sadly, there are a lot of women, and men, who feel “less than” sexually when, in fact, they are quite normal. The average woman takes 20 minutes to become sexually aroused — and, how shall I say it, in the rush to make their goal, many men forget not only the time, but the day of the week [insert laugh track here].

Imagine the mutual satisfaction if a man was aware that the experience is what is important to a woman, rather than rating “success” on whether she did or didn’t have an orgasm. What if he fully supported her “pleasure for the sake of pleasure” and de-emphasized orgasm? With less pressure to perform for both parties, there would be better, and dare I say it, more sex.

I have to write a word about “male performance”. What a doofy phrase. As if the man performs and the woman applauds. As we’ve seen above, that’s not always true. Take it from me, it’s not a performance, gents. Writer Gary Zukav talks very eloquently about the power of the sexual connection in his book The Seat of The Soul. In that book, Zukav suggests that forgetting the spiritual aspect of sex strips it of its meaning. In that way, too, the idea of “male performance” strips sex of the mutuality of the moment.

Just understanding that he needs a goal and she needs an experience could transform a relationship. Rather than expecting him to love shopping, just like she does, a woman could say, “I am going to respect his need to seek-and-destroy when he’s shopping and not browbeat him to enjoy it as much as I do.” Or a man might plan an outing with a woman and say, “Rather than try to climb to the top of Mt. Baldy as fast as possible, I’m going to make sure Susan really enjoys the experience. We’ll move at a reasonable pace and stop halfway to have a picnic lunch.”

Wouldn’t it be great if a male manager could acknowledge that there is more to work than meeting and beating objectives – and reward women who focus on team-building and systems strengthening? And a woman manager could recognize that the guys on the team need the satisfaction of having something to strive toward, and create a process to measure and reward progress toward the goal?

There is so much to learn and appreciate from the differences between men and women. If a man can learn from a woman to slow down and enjoy the experience, while the woman learns the satisfaction of making and reaching goals, a kind of relational balance can be had – a balance which makes life for each of them that much more full.