Category: Understanding The Male-Dominated Workplace

  • Are You the Last One to Return to the Office?

    Are You the Last One to Return to the Office?

    Women are conditioned to defer to others.  In school we were praised for raising our hand before we were called on to speak.  We won favoritism and were rewarded with special privileges for being “good girls.” 

    We also watched boys speak out of turn, disrupt class and disregard the rules.  Some boys were scolded.  But others learned how to get around the rules with charm and humor.  And even though their behavior was “bad,” they got attention which became its own form of reward. 

    So, boys learned that breaking the rules doesn’t necessarily result in negative consequences.    

    This difference in how boys and girls are conditioned became apparent during the COVID-19 era.  At first, all non-essential personnel worked from home.  But slowly that began to change.

    I live adjacent to a major road.  In late March and early April of 2020, I could pull out of my street onto the major road without even stopping.  There wasn’t a car in sight. 

    But then, the week after Easter traffic began to change.  Work trucks were back on the road.  Then by the end of April there were several cars which I noticed were driven by men. 

    Even as the news media reported that people were working from home traffic steadily increased each week.   

    Who wasn’t working from home anymore?

    My unofficial surveys indicated they were predominantly men.    

    To me this made sense. 

    From my decades of working with men, I knew many men who always showed up to work no matter what.  They came to work because they thought of themselves as “essential.”

    When COVID-19 broke out, we understood this was an emergency situation.  Therefore, the only people who went to work were people who dealt directly with the emergency (doctors and nurses) and those who provided critical services in support of the emergency (grocery store workers). 

    But then we stopped calling these people “emergency workers” and began calling them “essential workers.”  This opened the door for more people to return to work because to men “essential employees” means something very different from “emergency employees.”

    Having spent my career working with the trades, I know plumbers, roofers, HVAC mechanics and electricians respond to emergency situations and provide “essential” services.  This is why they were the first ones out on the road after Easter 2020. 

    I also know that when “routine” trade services such as maintenance are delayed, bad things happen. Things break and can quickly escalate into “urgent” and even “emergency” situations. Consequently, crises were created across many industries and workplaces.

    Most men understand this natural progression in their work. 

    They know authorities can’t command “shelter in place” and expect everything in existence to freeze.  They know the forces of physics, biology, nature and weather certainly won’t listen.  And these forces will create a growing ripple effect.  More and more of us will need to resume normal activities to prevent the escalation and spread of “urgent and emergency” situations.  

    Men are also acutely aware that the faster someone is required to return to work, the more essential (important) they are.    

    So, men began their progression back to their workplace in the order of their real or perceived importance.

    Parking lot with cars

    Men don’t want to be seen as one of those people who can disappear and not be missed. Because, if no one misses them, then their job isn’t important…and can be eliminated.

    This is why once back in the workplace men quietly note who is and isn’t in the office. They assess the pecking order.  They note who sees their job as important and who doesn’t. 

    Now as women, our good girl conditioning tells us to listen to “the experts” who tell us to keep working from home.  If we raise our hand to ask if we should come into the office, our workplace’s “official statement” is that we should continue to work from home.  So, we wait for permission to return to our workplace. 

    But are we the only ones waiting??

    How many of our male colleagues have gone back to the office either full time or part time? 

    Do we know?  (They certainly know we are still “at home.”) 

    We need to know.  We need to know if we are foolishly waiting to be praised for being a “good girl” who follows all of the rules but also sending the message that neither we nor our job is essential. 

    So, if you haven’t done so yet, drive by your workplace during work hours.  See how many and whose cars are in the parking lot. 

    Go into your workplace, even if you have to go in at night.  Take a look around and gauge the daytime activity.   You will be able to tell who does and doesn’t come into the office. 

    This information will tell you whether you are leaving yourself out and ultimately leaving yourself behind. 

    Only you can know when the right time to return is.  Just make sure you aren’t the last, unessential worker to return. 

    Empowered Women Don’t Get left Behind

  • From Little Girl to Leader

    From Little Girl to Leader

    I’ve been anticipating it and it finally happened.  Someone, (Ed Rollins) called Alexandria Ocasio Cortez “little girl.”

    Of course, AOC thought the comment was pure misogyny.  And her response probably caused lots of old guys to chuckle and shake their heads saying, “Oh little girl, you have so much to learn.”

    Obviously, there is a huge generation gap at play but in this case the “little girl” moniker is something AOC shouldn’t dismiss.  It’s a warning she should heed.

    Remember when Trump called Marco Rubio “Little Marco?”  It wasn’t a reference to his hand size or the size of anything else.  The slam meant that Rubio was still wet behind his ears.  He didn’t have the breadth of experience to be President.  Sure, Rubio had a lot of political policy positions, but he lacked real-world experience.  He was never responsible for executing his policy positions or accountable for their results.

    Rubio didn’t experience the hard knocks, leaving him green and untried.  Trump picked up on this created the “Little Marco” nickname.

    But Trump also gave him some respect.  He didn’t call him “Little Boy Marco.”

    Being called “little boy” or “little girl” means you don’t have the basic the knowledge to come up with good ideas.  It means you still need to learn how the world and your workplace function before you open your mouth and express your ideas.

    We are all “little boys” and “little girls” in the beginning of our careers.  Even though we have a college or technical degree, we haven’t applied our education out in the real world.  Therefore, we haven’t discovered the many ways our book learning fails against the realities of the world.

    We need to spend our early years wisely because what we learn in these years sets the path for the rest of our career.  We need to tackle challenging assignments and experience the hard knocks.  This is how we us learn and grow.  But most importantly, it’s how we earn respect.

    AOC needs that experience.  When she answers questions, her gaffs reveal how much she still has to learn.  So, she needs to spend the next few years quietly learning, challenging herself and growing.

    But unfortunately, she is in the social media spotlight.  And she may be confusing media popularity with respect.  She needs some old school mentors to pull her out of the spotlight, take her under their wing and challenge her.

    If she expects to be taken seriously, her ideas have to do more than sound and feel good.  She must make them complete and feasible.  She needs to figure out how to make them work in the real world.  Then she must have the courage to present them and be held accountable for their execution and their outcome.

    This is how it works in the real world for anyone, man or woman, who wants to be a leader.

    Empowered Women Don’t Stay “Little Girls”

  • Empowered Women Change the Toxic Male Workplace

    Empowered Women Change the Toxic Male Workplace

    My first boss died of a heart attack 4 months after I began working.

    A year later a male co-worker died of complications following quadruple by-pass surgery.

    Six months later a man I frequently worked out with died of a massive heart attack following a run.

    One month later, a male co-worker standing 20 feet from me, dropped dead of a massive stroke.

    I went to retirement parties and then attended funerals where we sadly sighed, “He never got to enjoy his golden years.”

    Many of my male colleagues were alcoholics.  It was common to be warned, “Don’t light a match near him today.”

    I lost track of how many male colleagues suffered breakdowns from stress.  And how many times I wondered if any of my male colleagues would show up for work because they were too stressed-out.  Or how many times I heard, “He will be out for a while – don’t know how long yet.”

    Heart attacks, high blood pressure, strokes, alcoholism, diabetes, high cholesterol, depression, chain smoking and drug addiction are what I think of when I hear the term “Toxic Male Workplace.”

    There absolutely was something “toxic” about the male-dominated workplace that impacted my male colleagues’ health.

    These health issues were compounded by the health issues resulting from the safety hazards and work conditions my male colleagues dealt with every day.

    Cancer from working around hazardous materials.  Cancer from excessive sun exposure.  Hearing loss from working around machinery and equipment.  Bad backs, knees, hands and hips from repetitive motions and physical work.  Arthritis and continuous pain from soft tissue injuries.

    Many of the men I worked with “in the office” were there because they suffered an injury and could no longer do the same work they did when they were young.

    Somewhere along the way I stopped counting how many men were killed in car accidents as they traveled to work locations.

    Nine of my male colleagues were injured in a propane tank explosion, two critically.  One never returned to work.

    One morning I went to work only to hear that a male colleague was electrocuted during the night while responding to an emergency call.

    In one workplace we began the new year with a man being killed at 8:15 in the morning.  It wasn’t a Happy New Year.

    I can tell lots of gruesome stories of injuries.

    So, when I hear the term “male privilege” this is what I think of:

    The privilege to do the hazardous and potentially life-altering jobs that few women do.

    Working alongside men, doing the same work as men, I don’t ever recall being jealous of my male colleagues or thinking they had it so much better than me. 

    As a woman, I am supposed to recount all the times I was a “victim” of the male-dominated workplace. However, I saw many more men victimized by it.

    I cannot recall how many times I thought, “I’m lucky to be a woman.”

    I felt lucky that so much of the pressure my male colleagues felt on a daily basis to get ahead, to provide financially for their family and to get the job done didn’t apply to me the same way it did them.  While those things were important to me, especially as a single mother, they didn’t impact my identity, my sense of self or how I perceived my value as much as it did them.

    I also felt fortunate that I had the power to change my workplaces in ways men could not.

    I lived through the male-dominated workplace’s self-improvement gyrations with its long line of initiatives, programs and technology to change and function better.  They all fell short of expectations and most faded away into obscurity.

    However, the initiative I introduced made a profound impact.

    I encouraged myself and the women I worked with to assert our female traits – our way of thinking and acting.

    As women (working in any role), we are well aware of the problems within the male-dominated workplace.  We see the stress, frustration and pressure. However, we don’t realize that the power to correct those problems lies within us – not men.

    It all begins by exercising our empathy.

    We know why “things go wrong” and why our male colleagues get frustrated and stressed out.  We have lots of ideas and even know how to fix and prevent some of the problems.  However, we remain silent or we talk among ourselves because we bought into the BS belief that we can’t make a difference.

    As women, we need to put our empathy into action. We need to speak up and say, “Do it this way.”

    And we can’t be deterred when they don’t get it or don’t listen.  We simply say, “Do you want your problem to go away or not?”

    It takes just one time of us fixing a problem to the get the wheels turning and start changing attitudes.

    So, we take the initiative and assert ourselves more, “I can tell you how to fix that problem too.”

    Men start listening.  Then they start thinking, “Maybe I should ask her about this other problem too.”

    Before you know it there is communication, collaboration and coordination.  Bigger and bigger problems are getting solved.  More problems are prevented.   Performance improves.

    Better yet, stress and frustration are reduced.  My guys told me, “I don’t feel like I’m coming to work and pounding my head against a brick wall all day.”

    That is so rewarding to hear.

    When we put our empathy into action, we create a happier workplace. We end the toxic male workplace.

    Empowered Women Put Their Empathy Into Action and Eliminate The Toxic Workplace

    To learn more, watch this YouTube video:

  • The Law of Physics That Applies to Men

    The Law of Physics That Applies to Men

    Newton’s Third Law of Motion is:

    For every Action, there is an equal and opposite Reaction

    As a female engineer, I discovered there is a similar law in the male-dominated workplace:

    When one man Acts, all other men must React

    Early in my career, my Reaction to this phenomena was to ask: “What are you guys doing?”

    To me it was wild to watch the frenzy of activity that went in all different directions as each man gave his individual response.

    Why do men act this way?

    They do it to maintain a balance of power and their individual status.  Now as women, we’re told men aspire to have power over each other.

    Not true.

    Men don’t want power over each other as much as they don’t want another man to have power over them. In other words, men want Autonomy more than power.

    So, when one man acts, all other men must react in a way that shows they are not subjugated to the actor.  If the actor acts in a way to prove his power over other men, then expect those men to rebel.

    Any man who doesn’t react is seen as weak. He isn’t a man who has a manly sense of self or self-respect. He is a submissive man who can easily be used and manipulated.

    Being a woman, this law of the male-dominated workplace didn’t apply to me, so I didn’t react.  Then of course a man asked in a frenzied, panicked voice “Aren’t you going to do something?”

    My response was typically:

    “Do what?  I’m not going to react just to react.  If I need to react, I will react and I will do so with the appropriate response.”

    In the first couple of years of my career men’s Law of Action and Reaction created one of my biggest pet peeves about working with men:

    Too many men shooting from the hip.

    It drove me nuts.

    When men shoot from the hip, they don’t take the time to figure out the appropriate and best response.  They don’t even take the time to figure out what really happened. They just React. Consequently, they create new but completely avoidable problems.  Men call this:

    The Law of Unintended Consequences

    I call it: The Law of IGNORED Consequences.

    Resolving unintended consequences wastes a lot of time and money which is my other big pet peeve.  So, out of my frustration I got very forceful at breaking the Law of Action and Reaction.

    One time when I was leading a meeting something happened. As soon as the guys started reacting, I ran and stood in front of the door. As I barred the door, I said:

    “Guys, STOP!  You don’t know what you are doing.”

    That got their attention because challenging men’s competency is always a good way to get their attention.  That’s another law of the male-dominated workplace.

    Before they could React to me, I would tell them:

    “Do you guys even know what you are reacting to?  No, you don’t.  So, let’s stop and figure out what is going on so we can respond the right way and we shut him down, for good.”

    You see, in the male-dominated workplace the Law of Action and Reaction is perpetual.  The original actor interprets the initial Reaction to his initial Action as an Action, so then he must React.  This Reaction is then interpreted by the original reactors as a new Action so they must React again. As so it goes back and forth.

    The words Action and Reaction with several arrows in between pointing in both directions to show the back and forth of actions and reactions

    This back and forth can go on and on for days, weeks, months, years…

    A great example of this is the Stock Market. 

    Something happens. The big investors immediately make the market plunge or soar.  But is the reaction the correct response?  There is no way to know because there is no tangible change in the performance of a company or sector yet.  They react to possibility of a change.

    Then when other men see the big guys acting, they get worked up into a frenzy:

    “I have to React. I have to React.”

    These “Momentum Investors,” then drive the market way too far up or way too far down – far beyond a reasonable response to the situation. But this is what happens when everyone is just reacting to what everyone else is doing.

    The Stock Market calls it “Volatility.”  I call it “Stupidity.”  There is no need for it if we stop and think about the situation.

    (However, on the positive side, it does create great opportunities for women to make money if we buy low when men over-tank the market and sell high when men get way too enthusiastic.)

    In the list of tangible values women bring to the male-dominated workplace, our ability to break the Law of Action and Reaction is at the top. 

    It is of enormous value because we can stop the behavior that leads to the creation of wasted time, money and manpower.  When we stop or disrupt this behavior we can make a huge direct and meaningful impact on productivity and the bottom line of our workplace.

    Empowered Women Don’t React Blindly. They Respond Appropriately.

    Making a video version of this blog to post on YouTube is on my to-do list. Stay tuned…and in the meantime, watch my other videos.

  • The HUGE Misperception Women Have About The Male-Dominated Workplace

    www.123rf.com 39546075

    Women have a HUGE misperception about the male-dominated workplace that has done incredible damage to our efforts to advance.

    Women work from a narrative that says men want to climb to the top so they can have power over others.  Many women believe men aspire to control and dominate others – they want to be authoritarians, dictators and the king.

    If you think about it, that makes men sound really dysfunctional and as if all men are inherently insecure with control issues.  But we know most men aren’t that way, they are normal guys.  However, the few that have real control issues – such as the recent list of powerful men who are sexual harassers – get a lot of attention and reinforce the narrative.

    In reality, men don’t aspire to have power over others.

    They aspire to keep others from having power over them.

    Men want to be autonomous – they want to be independent and have self-determination.  They want to exercise their own judgement to do what they want, when they want, how they want.  They don’t want to be treated like a child who has to ask permission or be told what to do.  Therefore they aspire to rise higher in the organization so there are fewer people above them who can tell them what to do.

    If you think about that too, you realize it is why every revolution, rebellion and resistance movement was fought.  It is why there are very few monarchies left.  Men fought for autonomy, self-determination and self-governance.

    So if men aspire to be autonomous then why do so many women believe men want power and are driven to protect their power structures?

    To understand that, we have to go back in time to when women had no legal rights and were completely dependent on men.  Women spent their lives in a precarious and vulnerable state.  Their only means to attain financial security, power and status was to attach themselves, through marriage or family affiliation, to a strong man with those attributes.  Therefore women needed to see the public sphere (the world of government and business) as the male proving ground where survival of the fittest played out and the strongest man rose to the top.  Women used men’s success in the public sphere to measure how good of a marriage prospect he was.

    Women saw the public sphere for what they needed it to be.  Their perceptions about how it functioned were formed by being on the outside looking in through their perspective. They weren’t formed by actually watching and observing how men interact with each other in the workplace.

    When women went into the male-dominated workplace they brought their perceptions with them.  They wrote their own narrative that one had to “tear down to rise up.”  This narrative said women had to fight men for power.  Women had to tear down men’s power structure in order for women to rise and take power for themselves.

    Women weren’t shy about stating they wanted to be the CEO’s, on corporate boards and in top government positions for power.  Once women obtained this power, they believed they could dictate new rules and exercise their control.  (Ironically, women stated that they wanted to be just like the men they wanted to tear down.)

    However, women’s belief in how they thought the male-dominated workplace worked clashed with how it really worked.

    Men who aspired to be autonomous, saw women’s quest for power and control as a threat to the autonomy they valued and the entire structure they built to promote their autonomy.  Faced with this threat, men resisted the advancement of women.

    For 40+ years, men and women have interacted through a huge misunderstanding of what the other wants and values.  Women interpreted men’s resistance to advancing women as men wanting to subjugate women.  Even when men treated women like men – like people who  valued autonomy as much as men – women felt rejected.  To women autonomy feels like you are being left to fend for yourself, no one supports you and you are in a sink or swim situation with no life preserver.  It doesn’t feel like you are being treated equal to your male colleagues – it feels like you are being ostracized.

    So when men treated women as their “equals”, women still saw it as men rejecting women in order to keep power for themselves.  It reinforced the narrative that men work off a power and control structure and that women needed to tear down that structure.  This in turn caused men to believe women worked off a power and control structure and men had to stop women in order to protect their autonomy.

    Even worse for women, men learned how to use women’s perception about the power and control structure against women.  If women want to believe men have all the power and women assume they are in an inferior position, men, especially dysfunctional men,  will take advantage of that.

    I suspect that the increase in harassment and bullying of women is due in large part to this dynamic.  Many men believe they will get away with it because women are taught they are powerless victims who cannot overcome the power structure.  And as I said earlier, these dysfunctional men get all the attention and reinforce the narrative that men are all about power and control.  We create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    Today we have a huge mess of misunderstandings and misperceptions we need to fix.

    In order for women to achieve equality and parity with men, they must first change their perspective and stop buying into the power and control narrative.  They have to see the male-dominated workplace for how it really functions and for the huge role AUTONOMY plays in its structure.

    Women need to watch and listen to the men they work with.

    Are they acting to have power and control over others?

    Or, are they acting to preserve their AUTONOMY – to do what they want, when they want, how they want?  Are they being isolationists who want to pretend their actions don’t affect other people and resist other people’s actions affecting them?  Do they resist listening to others, wanting only their voice to be heard?  Do they take autonomy to an extreme by becoming selfish, self-centered and even narcissistic?

    I guarantee that if you look for autonomy in the male-dominated workplace you will be shocked by how much of it you see.  It’s rampant.  As women, tune into all those things that bug you about working with men that don’t seem to come from power and control – they probably come from autonomy.

    Only when women learn to recognize autonomy and understand its power in the male-dominated workplace, will they put themselves on the right path to realizing their own equality.

    One more point.

    I use the Yin-Yang concept to describe the natural and correct interaction of men and women.  Notice in this image there are no power and control mechanisms.  It is about mutual influence and harmony.

    Therefore, for everything men do, women have a balancing, influencing reciprocal action.  We are inherently equal.

    However women will never recognize and exercise their inherent equality if they continue to work off of bogus narratives.  So change your perspective.  See the male-dominated workplace for how it really is.

    Empowered Women See the Male-Dominated Workplace For How It Really Functions

     

    Find this article helpful?

    Sign up to receive more

    Checkout my book. 

    Follow The Woman In The Room on Facebook

     

     

     

     

     

  • How Women Should Navigate the Drinking Culture

    www.123rf.com 74158468

    There are some industry cultures that endorse a drinking culture – frequently getting together after work to drink. Coming from one such industry I understand how it normalizes alcoholism and creates problems for women.

    Many women and women’s organization encourage women to participate in this culture in order to get ahead.  However, my been-there, dealt-with-that, opinion is that women must be very careful any time they are around men who drinking.

    Personally, I’m not much of a drinker – one glass of wine is my limit. So, I’m not big into getting together 3-4 nights a week after work for drinks.  Frankly, I have better things to do with my time.  And that is the first lesson about men who participate in the drinking culture – they don’t have a life outside of work.

    They don’t have a family or girlfriend they want to get home to.  They don’t have a dog or even a hamster to take care of.  They don’t go to the gym to work out, play a sport or have a hobby.  Sadly, work is their life because it is their escape from the rest of their life.  Recently separated or divorced men are often the ring leaders of getting the guys together after work so they don’t have to go home to a small, empty apartment.

    Women are mistakenly encouraged to go out with the guys for the social bonding that will build relationships and advance our careers.  But how much career advancement do we get from our peers?  Very little.

    We are also told we need to participate if our boss or management is going because it is a great time to pitch your ideas and get face-time.

    No it isn’t.

    When men leave work, they leave work.  At the bar they will discuss work but in the form of war stories.  They won’t be solving any workplace issues or making business decisions.   The only tangible value of going out with the guys is that we can pick up on tidbits of useful information – we can find out who worked on what and how they screwed up.  Those could be opportunities for us to assert ourselves – if we remain sober and clear headed enough to mine those gold nuggets of information.  But this is where we will run into problems – when we are out with the guys, we will be pressured to drink, a lot.

    The guys will offer to buy you drinks; they will buy you drinks even if you decline.  They will pressure you to keep up with them and it is easy to fall to the pressure unless you own your limits.

    As I said I am not much of a drinker and I proudly declare it.  Call me a light-weight.  Make me the Designated Driver.  The more pressure that is put on me to drink the more of I proudly I declare – to the entire bar – that I am a genuine light-weight.  Poke fun at me for my limits – I will accept the laughter at my expense because I know that the ability to laugh at myself is 100 times more important to bonding with the guys than how much or how often I drink.

    I also limit my drinking for my own safety.

    Women are encouraged to go out drinking with their male colleagues to become “one of the guys.”  But when there is a lot of drinking going on we must always remember that this is when we ARE NOT one of the guys.

    We all know what people are like when they get drunk.  And while I like to talk about how men and women are equal and how women have a mental strength, we lose our edge when we get intoxicated.  This gives men who are physically stronger an advantage and makes us vulnerable.  A woman who gets drunk in the presence of men puts herself in a dangerous situation.

    This situation is exponentially magnified when we are traveling out of town with the guys.

    There is a saying: “What happens out of town, stays out of town.”  This is men’s permission slip to behave badly in ways we never see them do at home.  The nice family man whose family hangs out with your family is suddenly hitting on you.  Or he’s in the “gentlemen’s club” disrespecting his wife with his activities.

    The bottom line is that when you go out of town for the first time with men, trust no one.  Act like prudish Little Miss Goody-Two-Shoes.  Don’t tell anyone your hotel room number.  Go to dinner with the guys but limit your drinks.  After dinner, you can hang out with the guys for a bit but beware of colleagues getting too friendly and asking lots of personal questions.  As soon as they do err on the side of caution and go to bed early.  Don’t accept offers to walk you to your room.  And if you get a knock on your door in the middle of the night by one of your colleagues, don’t answer it.  Don’t even respond.

    Set boundaries and make each man earn your trust.

    They understand what you are doing and they get it.  Most of the men will rise to the standards you set so you can trust them.  They will then be your protectors from the few men you cannot trust.

    I used to travel extensively and be the only woman.  When I worked on a project out of town, my company decided to rent two-bedroom apartments instead of hotel rooms.  As the only woman I shared an apartment with two different male colleagues, both of whom I trusted implicitly – but they earned my trust first.

    I also had a boss who I traveled with a lot who loved martinis.  I love green olives.  So I ordered a glass of wine and he ordered his martinis with extra olives for me.  It became our thing.

    And yes, there have been occasions when I had too much to drink and had a blast with some of my colleagues.  But again, the only men present were the ones I trusted beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    As women we can be one of the guys but only in a safe environment.  Too often women in their efforts to be equal, act like one of the guys, forgetting the obvious differences.  They trust all men and make men earn distrust.   But by the time the distrust is earned there was an incident – it’s too late and there are regrets.

    Our equality is not about acting the same as men.  It is about exercising our inherent power to influence men.  We set the standards for acceptable behavior around us and only trust the men who prove they can rise to our standard and be our equal.

    Empowered Women Know When They Can be One of the Guys and When They Can’t

    Find this article helpful?

    Share and Sign up to receive more

    Checkout my New Book:

    The Woman In The Room: How I Realized the Unique Value of Women in the Male-dominated Workplace

    Follow The Woman In The Room on Facebook

     

     

     

  • There Was a Time When Men Were Gentlemen in the Workplace

    www.123rf.com 22041589

    We have a lot of impressions of what the professional office was like in the 1960’s and 1970’s.  But our impressions probably miss one important characteristic – its civility.

    When I began working in 1982 I was the first female engineer in a very traditional office.  Men were engineers, designers, draftsmen and managers while women were secretaries.   Contrary to the popular myths, secretaries weren’t subservient, didn’t fetch coffee or do other menial tasks for the men.  They, in spite of their administrative roles, wielded a lot of informal power.

    Secretaries set the rules of conduct for the office.  They were a continuous reminder to men to elevate their behavior and they expected men to conduct themselves as gentlemen in their presence.  Words such as “please” and “thank you” were always used.

    As the female engineer I witnessed how my male colleagues conducted themselves when  they were by themselves versus around women.  For the most part they were the same.  I overheard a few “spirited” discussions in meetings but whenever I was present they watched themselves and toned it down.   Any time a man cursed in my presence he turned to me and apologized.  Even though I wasn’t offended, I acknowledged the apology and accepted it.

    I understood that my presence was also a continuous reminder to men to be their better selves.  It was also a reminder for me to set a higher example so I seldom cursed.

    As part of their gentlemanly behavior men always opened the door for me so I could enter first.  Most of my coworkers were civilians even though I was an Air Force officer so it wasn’t and awkward situation with them or the enlisted force.  However, the situation became awkward when I was with more senior officers.

    According to protocol, the junior ranking officer opens the door for the senior officers.  But since I was a woman the senior officers opened doors for me.  This got especially confusing one day when I went running at lunch at the same time as the three most senior officers on base.  As we entered the gym I went to open the door for them but one of the officers also rushed to open the door for me.  His long arms beat me to the door so I entered first.

    Not knowing if this was proper, I took my concern to the base women’s  group to discuss.  We had an interesting discussion:  were we officers first and women second OR women first and officers second?  We concluded that we were officers first and women second however, the male officers were also an officer and a gentlemen.

    As female officers (all of us very low ranking) we recognized that we were in a more precarious position than our male peers.  We needed the male officers to be gentlemen and chivalrous.  While most men were well behaved we all witnessed the ugly side of men and knew there could be a time we needed a man to be a chivalrous and intervene in a situation on our behalf.  Therefore we concluded that if male officers wanted to elevate Gentleman above Officer we should let them.  We expected that as the number of female officers increased eventually we would be seen as just another officer and normal protocols would take over.

    Little did we know how things would really change.

    For the first 20 years of my career most men acted with the same gentlemanly behavior around me.  They opened doors and apologized for any cursing or off-color comments in my presence.  My language however deteriorated a bit, especially when I was working out on a construction site.  Overall though things were evolving well.

    But then it changed.

    Suddenly, it is politically incorrect to treat women any different than men. Feminism interpreted men’s gentlemanly behavior as men seeing women as inferior. Opening a door for a woman was equivalent to discrimination and sexual harassment.  Women proudly proclaimed “I opened this door myself because I am equal.”

    These women didn’t understand that opening the door ourselves didn’t say anything about our equality – it was about encouraging polite and civil behavior to protect women from abuse and harassment.

    This misunderstanding created unintended consequences.

    Under intense pressure men stopped being gentlemen.

    This is a prime example of what men do to each other as a prank that is not acceptable to do to a woman.

     

    The minimal standard of acceptable behavior was removed.  With chivalry gone more crude behavior set in. Men could get away with anything by simply saying “That’s how I treat the guys. You want me to treat you differently?”

    Women were put in a difficult position.  Complaining about men’s behavior meant you couldn’t cut it as “one of the guys” or be their equal.  A complaint was a sign of weakness and inferiority.

     

    In response women also lowered their behavior and increased their aggressiveness in order to become “one the guys” and fit in.  Our behavior gave men permission to go even lower because in men’s minds, women should act better than men.  Crudeness, aggressiveness, meanness and bullying increased.  Dysfunctional and controlling men became more powerful and got away with more.   Overt sexual behavior towards women became common.

    For my own safety I divided men into two groups – those I trusted and those I didn’t.  Early in my career, the men I didn’t trust were the rare exceptions.  Later in career, they were the majority and the men I trusted were the exceptions.

    Today women are treated far worse in the workplace than they were in the 80’s.  It seems more men have no bottom limit to their behavior and see the workplace as a competition where it isn’t good enough to simply beat a competitor – they also have to demean and hurt them.

    It is up to women to reverse this situation.  We have to go back to asserting ourselves and using the Power of “No” to establish and enforce civil and polite behavior.  For centuries, this was our role in society.  Even without any legal rights we wielded our power and moral authority to better society and fight for social causes including abolition, temperance, children, the working poor and the rights of women.  Unfortunately when we went into the workplace in larger numbers, we left this power behind.  That was our mistake.  But we can correct it.  That’s what our rights and equality are for.

    Empowered Women Demand and Enforce Civil Behavior

    To learn more about the inherent power of women checkout my new book:

    The Woman In The Room: How I Realized the Unique Value of Women in the Male-dominated Workplace

    Follow The Woman In The Room on Facebook

     

     

  • The Suicide Pact Myth

    www.123rf.com 12432420 –

    A few weeks ago while working with the TV on, I heard a commentator relay a rumor that Tillerson, McMaster and Mattis had a “suicide pact” and if one left they would all leave.

    I found myself yelling at the TV – “You guys don’t know what you are talking about.  No one goes through with a suicide pact!”

    As a woman who has supervised lots of men, suicide pacts were part of my daily life, beginning in my first management position and never stopping.

    Suicide pacts are typically voiced as:

    “If George gets fired then Jim, Terry, Dan, Paul and Bob will quit.”

    “If George doesn’t get the promotion then he will quit and so will Jim, Terry, Dan, Paul and Bob.”

    The first time I faced the threat of a suicide pact I saw it for what it was – an intimidation tactic.

    I also didn’t miss the fact that it was played out on me because I was a woman.  They guys thought I was more likely to cave into their demands than one of my male supervisors who would have met their threat with several choice words.

    In the early years of my career my initial response was to be dumbfounded.  I thought about giving them the dramatic, tearful, hysterical response they wanted:

    “Oh no!  You can’t quit!  I am just a poor little woman who is in over her head.  I won’t survive without you!  I will give you anything you want – just please don’t leave me!”

    I may have actually used that response a couple of times when I was in a “don’t jerk me around” mood.  But for the most part, I gave them a more direct and realistic response:

    “So you’re telling me you are going home and telling your wife ‘Honey  you will be so proud of me!  I quit my job today because George didn’t get the promotion!’  I’m sure that will go over well.”

    And that’s the truth.  No one quits their job because someone else didn’t get a promotion, got fired or got laid off.

    As I woman I’ve faced countless suicide pact threats and had only 1 man actually go through with it after I fired his supervisor.

    The rest of the men in the pact eagerly showed up for work the next day vying to fill the newly vacant supervisor position.

    It only took a week before the man who quit was asking his pact members to help him get his job back.  It took them another two weeks to get up the courage to ask me if he could come back.

    I said “No.”

    The man went to work for his fired supervisor but didn’t have steady work.  After 2 months his pact mates approached me again.  I made it clear that I don’t put up with people who try to intimidate me.  (The man had sent me nasty emails prior to firing his supervisor.)  After two weeks of negotiating I hired back the man in a lower position and for less pay.  I also made him come to my office and apologize to me in person.

    As women we have to respond to suicide pacts for what they are – an intimidation tactic with no weight.  The men who use them are all bark and no bite.  Therefore, we never give into them.

    They do however give us important feedback about our team.  The men who use them don’t tolerate stress well.  They use the suicide pact as a means to hide that fact that they are under stress and really want to quit.  Ironically, defying the suicide pact by firing or not promoting their supervisor and bringing in someone who is more capable, is often the best remedy to their stress.  They just don’t see it.

    As good managers and leaders, it is our job to see it for them and have the courage rise above the threat to do what is best for everyone.

    And as for Tillerson, Mattis, Kelly and McMaster, I suspect they all have very high stress limits and would never think of using a suicide pact.  But whoever initiated the rumor is revealing their own perceptions and their stress needs to be addressed.

    Empowered Women Aren’t Intimidated by Suicide Pacts

    Find this article helpful?

    Sign up to receive more and check out my New Book!
    Follow The Woman In The Room on Facebook
    Take a quick moment to share 

  • Open and Honest Communication Advances Women

    www.123rf.com 23735932

    I remember when it was rare to be a woman in the workplace who wasn’t a secretary or in HR.  I began my engineering career in the Air Force on a base with 5,000 airmen.  When I arrived you could count the number of female officers on one hand and the senior ranking woman was a 1st Lt.

    Using today’s popular narratives, you would expect that we faced horrible conditions – discrimination, sexual harassment, subjugation etc.

    Not true.

    Instead there was a lot of curiosity.  That curiosity led to questions.  The questions led to countless conversations about the role of men and women in the workplace and in the home.

    Those conversations happened informally in offices and in shops.  They also happened formally through a committee of women the base leadership established.  Anyone could bring their questions and concerns about working with the opposite sex to the committee.

    The example I remember is a NCO in aircraft maintenance who came to us about his one female aircraft mechanic.  While working  in the hanger it got hot so he told everyone they could take off their fatigue top and just work in their t-shirts.  Back in those days, we wore white t-shirts so when the woman took off her fatigue top you could see her bra through it…and it was leopard print.  The NCO had her put her fatigue top back on but then he was worried about her working in the heat.  He reassigned her to a different task which wasn’t fair to her or the men.

    Our solution was simple.  The female aircraft mechanic should wear a white or beige bra with her uniform and save the leopard print for her civilian clothes.  We also told the NCO that her bra will still be visible under her t-shirt (we all knew this from personal experience) but he and the other male mechanics just had to deal with it.  (Yes, we were still a bit prudish back then.)

    Later we followed up with the female mechanic and she said everything worked out fine.

    What was drastically different between those days and today is that back then we had open honest direct communication where anyone could honestly express their point of view, fears or vulnerabilities.  No subject was off limits.  And no one was told their ideas and opinions were wrong.

    We recognized that we were all in new territory.  We recognized that most men had no experience working with a woman as a peer just like we had no experience working with men.  Therefore our objective was to broaden everyone’s perspective and comfort zone without incrimination.

    Through our very politically incorrect conversations men and women got to know each other and build the relationships necessary for women to realize our equality.

    That is how it was for about 20 years.  Then everything changed.  Suddenly we were all being called into training seminars where we were “educated” about each other.  We were told what we could and could not say.

    www.123rf.com 31134098

    As the woman in the room, the spotlight was on me.  “Diversity” singled me out and labeled me as “different.”  I was told in front of my male colleagues that I could bring my issues to HR or the Diversity office and they would help me, confidentially.

    My response was “I don’t have any issues.”

    The trainer however looked at me as if to say, “You can tell us what’s really going on later.”

    I could feel the walls going up in all of my male colleagues.

    After the training I talked to my boss.  He asked me if there were any issues I never voiced and I told him there weren’t.  But the trust was damaged.  We could no longer talk openly and honestly as we always had.  For several months the guys and I walked around on eggshells with each other as I slowly re-built their trust.

    I was furious.

    I was furious at the arrogance of a training seminar swooping in and damaging both my relationships and my career.

    I was furious that these supposed experts were ignorant of the one rule that helped women like me – open and honest communication.

    I was beyond furious that they didn’t talk to me before the training.  They just assumed that I was a timid, insecure woman who couldn’t stand up for herself.  I felt more insulted and degraded by something meant to empower me than I had ever felt by an incident in my career.

    And I wasn’t the only woman who felt that way.  I knew many women who broke through all kinds of barriers without any outside help who felt like our strength and confidence were no longer politically correct.  We were supposed to sit around and talk about how we were “victimized” evn though we didn’t feel like victims.  We wanted to talk about how we tackled issues, kicked butt and distinguished ourselves.

    After years of diversity training classes, it was one of the last ones I attended that finally gave me some satisfaction.  My diverse team and I sat through 2 hours of being told how to be politically correct with each other.  Immediately afterwards, we all looked at each other and said “We’re going to keep doing what we’ve been doing.”  And we all walked out.

    Very concerned, the trainer came to see me.  I unloaded on her.  I told her she didn’t know the first thing about being a woman like me and she sure as heck didn’t know the men I worked with and supervised.  I told her we were a tight team and we weren’t going to allow her or anyone else to divide us.  We all experienced that before and this time we decided to take a stand and say “No.”

    I realize that what I resented all those years was that someone who never walked in my shoes and never talked to me about my experiences thought they had the credentials to tell me how to deal with being the woman in the room.

    But more so than that, I felt like my voice and the voice of other experienced women didn’t count.  More accurately, we were supposed to remain silent because what we had to say may contradict the popular or media-driven narratives.   

    That has to change.  We need to bring back open and honest conversation so more women with real-world experience can lead in advancing women in the workplace.  We after all,  are the ones who can say “Been there, dealt with that, let me tell what works.”

    Empowered Women Know Open and Honest Conversations Work Wonders

    Find this article helpful?

    Sign up to receive more and check out my New Book!
    Follow The Woman In The Room on Facebook
    Take a quick moment to share 

  • Political Swamp Wars

    Like everyone else I am tuned into this year’s Presidential race but I am fascinated by it from a different perspective.  After working in and studying the male-dominated workplace for 30 years, I am fascinated by watching so much of what I talk and write about play out daily on the television screen.5629429_s

    In recent weeks the various cable news channel pundits have been lamenting in bewilderment: Who would have projected a year ago that Trump would actually become the 2016 Republican nominee?

    I immediately jump up wave my hands and shout “I did! I did!  I did! I did!  I knew he would win!”

    Did I believe this because I am a Trumpeteer and I have great faith in my candidate?

    No.

    It had to do with understanding the male-dominated workplace.  While other people were amazed, shocked and even horrified by the GOP debates, I just stood in my living room saying “Welcome to my world folks!  This is what I deal with.”

    This election cycle is exposing what is happening behind the scenes in the male-dominated workplace: A war.  Contrary to what we may expect, this war isn’t over policy positions.  It isn’t Men versus Women.  It isn’t Democrat versus Republican or Progressive versus Conservative.

    This war is over which character in the male-dominated workplace is going to be our Great American Hero.

    I call it Swamp Wars.

    Several years ago, I posted a satirical article on my website Swamp Wars This Century’s Battle for Status.  I first drafted it over 5 years ago to express my frustration over how my male colleagues put more time and energy into fighting and villainizing each other for status than into constructing our projects.  They created petty arguments; fighting merely for the sake of fighting.  Their only intention was to force the other side succumb to their position which of course never happened. After they wasted an inordinate amount of time, energy and money and put both sides into major crisis, they gave up.  We were forced to sit down together and solve the problems in order to survive.

    Let me repeat that.  They sat down together and solved problems.

    In our problem solving there were no winners and losers because everyone had to abandon their positions.  Let me repeat that again too.  Everyone had to abandon their positions in order to properly identify the problem, solve it and get the project done.

    Like my male colleagues, politicians engage in Swamp Wars but they raised it to an art form.  They want us to believe they can argue policy positions and make the other side succumb to their position.  They refuse to modify their policy position let alone abandon it.

    They are trapped in election cycles that are nothing more than petty battles resulting in small wins and losses – but they tease that a big glorious overwhelming victory is possible.  In the meantime, nothing is accomplished, no problems are solved.

    Since drafting Swamp Wars 5 years ago I watched with humor as it played out in our national politics.  In 2015 when the TV pundits began talking about how the presidential election would be Hillary Clinton versus Jeb Bush, I immediately thought “OMG!  They are setting up the presidential election to be a Swamp Wars battle!  WWE move over!  This is going to be 10,000 times better!”

    Swamp Wars is all about who attains Hero status.

    To understand Swamp Wars, you have to understand the 4 main characters in the male-dominated workplace.  I’ve watched these characters throughout my career.  In 1991 I wrote my first essay on changes in the male-dominated workplace that were threatening the status of the highest ranking and most heroic workplace character – The Great American Alligator Slayer.  Swamp Wars is about how the other 3 characters try to usurp the status of the Great American Alligator Slayer in order to claim his title of the Ultimate American Hero.4206824_m

    I based Swamp Wars and the characters on the old analogy that when you are buried in problems, you are up to your waist in alligators.  Each character has a different way of dealing with alligators (problems).

    It is also important to keep in mind that in order to have Heroes we need villains but more importantly we must have problems.  No problems, no Heroes.

    In today’s male-dominated workplace the characters are:

    The Great American Alligator Slayer (Operations):  He is our classic Hero.  He is a combination of Teddy Roosevelt and John Wayne.  He will kill the alligators and solve problems with his big guns and larger than life personality!  He’s a man’s man, hard-charging, he calls it as he sees it and runs over anyone that gets in his way.  He is both feared and respected.  On his office wall hangs dozens of alligator hides – his trophies – for all to admire and be in awe of.  Through human history young boys dreamt of growing up and becoming the next Great American Alligator Slayer – of slaying an alligator larger and more fierce than any ever known before and becoming the greatest Hero ever known.

    Swamp Drainers (Planners, Analyzers, Researchers):  They believe the Great American Alligator Slayer is obsolete.  They believe alligators (problems) exist because of the environment – because the swamp exists.  Figure out how to drain the swamp and the alligators will go away.  They know design techniques, processes and procedures, six sigma, statistics and financial analysis.  They can redesign the environment and refine the swamp draining process so all the alligators leave, negating the need for big guns.  Swamp Drainers rely on their brains and ingenuity not brawn to eliminate alligators.

    Swampers (Nerds and Geeks):  Once Swamp Drainers, Swampers broke away forming their own group.  They based their identity in technology.  Using technology they developed navigations tools to move quickly through the swamp’s vast network of waterways.  They live in the swamp and know it better than the other characters.  They compiled massive amounts of information about the all of the swamp’s plant life, animals and fish.  They know where the alligators nest and breed and can provide that information to the other characters, if they want.  They enjoy living in the swamp, content with their separation and happy to interact only with other Swampers using languages outsiders don’t understand.  They called themselves Swampers in keeping with their newly found coolness.

     

    Naturalists (Intellectuals):  Naturalists identify with Plato’s Philosopher-Kings.  Highly intelligent, they attend expensive and prestigious universities where they attend lectures and hold discussions.   They write op-eds based upon other papers they read and their internal discussions with other Naturalists.  They aren’t the get your hands dirty type – they visit the swamp once but it is in a guided tour with luxury hotel accommodations outside the swamp at night.  Their visit merely checks a square so they can say they have been to the swamp.  They spend their careers in Naturalist groups far away from the swamps.  They believe possessing a superior intellect should be the only gateway through which one should be allowed to access the best information on swamps.  It is through their extensive academic study of the swamp, that they consider themselves swamp experts.  And in keeping with their identification with Philosopher-Kings they believe their swamp expertise makes them worthy of governing the swamp and all other characters.

    In America, we love men of action.  Men who make things happen against all odds. Men who git ‘er done.

    In America our Action Hero is The Great American Alligator Slayer.

    Great American Alligator Slayers are the men (and women) who forged our nation.  They were bold and courageous.  Christopher Columbus sailed out into the unknown to discover this continent.  George Washington led the Revolutionary War as a General in the battle field and daringly crossed the Delaware.  Lewis and Clark set out on an expedition across the vast western territory to the Pacific Ocean.

    As the industrial revolution emerged, so did new Great American Alligator Slayers.  Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, John D. Rockefeller and Henry Ford were just some of the Captains of Industry.

    Wars produced many Great American Alligator Slayers from lowly Privates to Five Star Generals.  World War II produced an entire generation of male and female Alligator Slayers, heroes and heroines.  I was in the Air Force during the Cold War and part of the Strategic Air Command (SAC) which was filled with Alligator Slayers and led by many Great American Alligator Slayers who inspired my portrayal of this character.

    We think of most of our Presidents as Great American Alligator Slayers.

    When we had a manufacturing based economy, the male-dominated workplace was filled with Alligator Slayers and Swamp Drainers.  Most were average working class men.  Some were college educated.  Since then technology added Swampers to the workplace.  Together these three characters became the Doers – the people who contributed a valuable piece towards producing tangible products and services.

    We expected the men at the top of the workplace hierarchy to be Doers – the men who accomplished the most; the men with the most trophies and plaques on their wall.  Typically they were Alligator Slayers.  But we believed any man (or woman) could pull himself up to the top.  He just had to be a Doer who worked hard and persevered.   This made America unique from the rest of the world.

    To understand how unique American is, we have to understand a little about Plato’s philosophies.  He believed in a society where there is a hierarchy of three classes of people:

    1. Philosopher-Kings (and Queens) at the top who have the intellect and wisdom to govern
    2. Auxiliaries – the men and women who protect and defend the state (military)
    3. Producers – professionals and skilled workers.

     

    Our Great American Alligator Slayers come from Plato’s Auxiliaries and Producers.  In America, we allow men in the bottom two classes to rise up to the top and be our Heroes.  We even allow them to be President and govern!

    Where are the Naturalist/ Philosopher-Kings in our workplaces?!

    Oh – they were kicked out of the male-dominated workplace a long time ago because they couldn’t cut it.

    Literally!

    Alligator Slayers drove them out because they couldn’t get their work done on time.  Naturalists spent too much time thinking and pondering to take any action, no matter how much Alligator Slayers ripped into them.  They were driven out to form their own boutique consulting companies where they could conduct studies and work endlessly on plans and papers.  When I was in the Air Force, the Alligator Slayers told me which two consulting companies hired the Naturalists they kicked out and told me to never work for those companies.

    Many years later, when a man from one of those companies walked onto my construction site, I knew something had changed – Swamp War was declared!

    This Naturalist immediately took on the Alligator Slayers.  He was going to force them to succumb to his will.  He openly declared he was taking his rightful position at the top of the hierarchy.

    This desire to reclaim the status of Naturalists in the workplace began within the Baby Boomer generation.  They were raised with the American image of the self-made man but they were also told to get a higher education so they could work with their head and not their hands.

    Over the next several decades we continued to elevate the status of the college educated, especially those who attended Ivy League colleges and universities.  This elite education made Ivy League graduates the great thinkers worthy of directing the Doers.  We also understood that with an Ivy League education you could bypass all of the lower rungs of the workplace hierarchy and begin your career near the top.

    In our old image of the self-made action-oriented man, we respected the man who came up with an idea and made it happen.  Today we respect and admire the man who came up the idea.  He isn’t expected to implement the idea or lead the implementation.  He leaves that to the Doers.

    Today we think of management and the C-suite being filled by highly educated and intellectual people.  An MBA is requirement and Doers are excluded.

    Many Doers are the un-college educated or vocationally educated workforce.  We dismiss these Doers as potential managers because they lack the right education.

    The Doers who are highly educated professionals are dismissed too.  They spent their career in roles that were too “hands-on” or too close to the uneducated workforce.  It is these Professional Doers that Naturalists challenged in Swamp Wars because Professional Doers got their hands dirty and therefore were tainted.

    What does this have to do with politics?

    Well in case you haven’t noticed, Congress (and Washington) is now full of Naturalists – people who got a degree law, political science or liberal arts from an Ivy League or other elite university and went directly into government or politics.  We used to call these people Bureaucrats.

    Bureaucrats never held a real job in a company that has to make money producing a product or service.  They never learned how to make things happen.  In the old days we called Bureaucrats paper shufflers because they spent their day moving paper from one side of their desk to the other without producing anything tangible.

    Today, Congressional and Washington Naturalists believe they do produce something – policies.  But are policies really tangible?

    What does a policy produce, do or make happen?

    Think about your workplace policies which probably address dress code, vacation time and ethics.  Do the policies tell you how to do your actual work or do you rely on our workplace processes and procedures for that?

    In politics, Governors are quick to claim they aren’t Naturalists – they are Alligator Slayers.  They tout how they have to make “executive decisions” to make things happen.  They have to deal with real alligators such as striking teachers, crumbling infrastructure and natural disasters.  They want to distinguish themselves from policy producing Congressional Naturalists who make speeches, attend committee meetings, hold hearings and raise money for their next campaign.

    Governors also like to remind Senators that the Presidency is an Alligator Slayers position and therefore they are best suited for the Presidency.  Historically, that is correct – our Presidents were Doers, not Naturalists, intellectual Philosophers or policy wonks.

    That is up until the election of Obama, a pure Naturalist.

    Following Bill Clinton’s (Alligator Slayer) presidency, the Democratic party became very  comfortable with Naturalists.  I credit this to Hillary Clinton (Naturalist).  She used her position as First Lady to take the Naturalist out of the back shadows and assert the Plato’s theory that Naturalists should be at the top and govern.

    This sent out shockwaves.

    At the time most men in powerful positions saw themselves as Alligator Slayers who earned their place at the top.   While we often believe she came under fire for stepping out of the traditional role of First Lady and for being an assertive woman, the real issue was that she challenged men’s personal self-images as Alligator Slayers.

    Most men believed they got to their power position by trudging through the swamps slaying alligators.  They had th alligator hides hanging all over their “I Love Me” walls to prove it.  Now this woman was coming along and saying that their hard earned trophies were irrelevant.   She said her diplomas said she was worthy of governance and trumped all of their alligator trophies.

    In response, the Alligator Slayers did what they do best.  They went hunting.  Hillary season was opened.

    As the years went on, up and coming generations of Alligator Slayers were taught to hunt Hillaries.  On the surface the fighting appeared to be gender-related but all along it was really Swamp Wars.  Alligator Slayers weren’t going to take direction from or respect anyone, male or female who doesn’t have alligator trophies hanging on their wall.  (Very important concept to understand!)(And trophy size does matter!)

    Hillary swung open the door for Naturalists to assert themselves.  Because most Intellectual Elites in the ‘90’s were already in the Democratic party, the first Naturalists to assert themselves were Democrats.

    For the Republicans however, the rise of Naturalists began their mass identity crisis.  Republican Senators and Congressmen knew they weren’t Great American Alligator Slayers – they were at best okay Alligator Slayers.  And if they were really honest they would admit that they really were Naturalists.  But they couldn’t – they had ideal images and icons to emulate.Alligator Slayer

    John Wayne, Charlton Heston and Clint Eastwood were Great American Alligator Slayers (at least in the movies).  Then there was Ronald Reagan, who epitomized their image of the political Great American Alligator Slayer.  What would happen to his legacy if Republicans suddenly elevated Naturalists?!

     

    Republicans had no choice but to promote themselves as Alligator Slayers.  (Bring on the NRA and the Second Amendment!)

    With Bush 43, a former Governor from the great (and manly) state of Texas in the White House they rallied around their Alligator Slayer identity.

    Then 9/11 happened.

    It was a tragedy that called for the heroic valor only Great American Alligator Slayers can provide.  Naturalists were shoved back into their corner or suddenly transformed themselves into Alligator Slayers.

    But following 9/11 the great victories Alligator Slayers promised didn’t come.  (Iraq War)  Naturalists reasserted themselves.  Maybe the Great American Alligator Slayer (Cheney, Rumsfeld) is an obsolete, relic of the 20th century.  The 21st century is the age of technology.   We now rely on our brains not our brawn to get things done.  High tech is the future, manufactured mechanics are in the past.

    By the time the 2008 Presidential election rolled around the momentum was with Naturalists.  The Democratic primary featured two pure Naturalists, Hillary and Obama.  A woman and an African American  man created the imagery of heading down a new path in a new century towards a new future led by a new kind of Hero.

    Yes, Hero not Heroine.  The one thing we didn’t leave behind in the 20th century was our love for Heroes, as in male Heroes.  Democrats and eventually America chose a knight in shining armor on his fiery steed who was going to usher in the new era of hope and change, of intellectualism and technology.  We trusted our Hero, to deliver our new future.

    The Republicans meanwhile were in a state of utter confusion.  The Great American Alligator Slayers didn’t deliver the big victory.  Should they jump on the Naturalist bandwagon?

    What about Reagan?

    Confused they nominated McCain in 2008 who was a confusing mixture of Alligator Slayer (war hero) and Naturalist (Senator).  In 2012 they nominated Romney who was another confusing mixture.  While a Governor he was also a Venture Capitalist and Venture Capitalists are NOT Alligator Slayers.  They DO NOT go into swamps.  They DO NOT slay alligators.  They wear alligators.  They have alligator shoes, belts and wallets produced by the common masses of Doers.

    After losing two election cycles, the Republicans decided for 2016 they would return to their roots, to a Governor and  an Alligator Slayer.  Better yet, so there is absolutely no further confusion, an Alligator Slayer with a family lineage of (Great American?) Alligator Slayers.  Jeb Bush was their man.

    The Democrats had long decided Hillary was going to be their nominee.

    The cable TV news channels began announcing there was going to be an iconic Swamp War battle:

    Naturalist Hillary Clinton

    Versus

    Alligator Slayer Jeb Bush

     

    Our polarized and partisan politics worked on this battle for years and it was finally coming to fruition.  Each side used polarizing policy positions to emotionally work up their most fervent supporters.  They maximized the distance between their policy positions so no one accidently wandered over to the other side.  Gender cards could be played.  Family histories dragged out.  It was going to be a wonderful show and the Media couldn't wait!

    Will more Americans identify with being Intellectuals or with being Alligator Slayers?

    Not that it really matters.  As long as everyone stays locked in place by their by their partisan policy positions, no problems will be solved.  No one will advance.  Swamp Wars will continue on and it will play out every 4 years in dramatic fashion.  The real winner is the Media.

    The only thing that does matter is making sure one side doesn’t have the big victory and make a clean sweep by taking the Presidency, Senate and House.  This would be bad for the Washington Bureaucrat Naturalists (Democratic or Republican) who won because they would now be expected to make things happen, get things done.  They would have to convert policy positions into tangible action.  Yikes.

    Thankfully partisanism keeps the odds of a clean sweep very low.

    The big Swamp War battle was all set.  But then something unexpected happened.

    Enter Trump.

    His optics were perfect.  He leaves his gilded office from up high in the Tower and rides the escalator DOWN to join the people.  He begins his announcement speech and jaws drop.

    He is speaking in a long forgotten language.  And he is doing it in the open…in front of TV cameras for all the world to see!

    Masses of Doers cheer.  He is unashamedly speaking their language in public.  Naturalists in media, universities, politics and intellectual institutes are horrified.  He can’t say that!

    What Naturalists didn’t understand and many still don’t understand is that Trump is speaking in the language of the Alligator Slayer.  Naturalists don’t know the language because they don’t spend time in the swamps where it is spoken.

    I will admit that I laughed at the media freak out because I speak Alligator Slayer.  I learned it because I work in traditionally male roles in the swamp.  It is a horribly inarticulate, punctuated and fragmented language.  Simplistic words are used to convey paragraphs of meaning because Doers are too busy working for long eloquent discussions where words are carefully chosen.  After working with men for so long I sometimes find myself speaking Alligator Slayer to other women who have never been in the swamp and it gets me in trouble.  Non-speakers don’t understand the nuanced meaning of the simplistic words so they apply their non-swamp definition and misunderstand.

    Naturalists of course believe Trump should be and is speaking their language so they believe their interpretation of what he says is correct.  This is why they were dumfounded that all of his supposed gaffs only increased the number of his supporters.  Doers understood exactly what he was saying.

    When media and political Naturalists interpret the supposed gaffs as “–isms”, Doers were reminded that Naturalists don’t understand or respect the culture of the hard working Doer.  Naturalists associated lacking a college degree with being ignorant and backwards.  Naturalists didn’t understand how much Doers depend upon each other when working in the swamp – how they do risky jobs and have to trust the person working next to them.  They don’t understand that when your safety or life depends upon your co-worker, you only care about how well your co-worker does his job.  You don’t care about their race, gender or religion.  The put downs only served to remind Doers that Naturalists haven’t worked in the swamps, don’t know how to get things done and certainly can’t solve Doer’s problems.  So, Doers will listen to the man who speaks their language because maybe he does know how to solve their problems.

    For months as media and political Naturalists mocked Trump, all l I could think is “Guys, you just don’t get it.”

    In order to understand Trump’s supporters, you first have to understand the Alligator Slayer Creed written by Teddy Roosevelt:

    1397396_sIt is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.

    The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

    Doers are in the arena.  They know Trump is in the arena.  Doers can forgive Trump just about anything because he is in the arena.

    Doers see Political and Media Naturalists as the critics in the stands and as those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

    This has been the difference in perspectives.  Media pundits see Trump from their media perspective as a narcissistic Reality TV star wanting more attention.  They probably even thought he was a Naturalist Wanna-be, running for the Presidency so he could join their elite club.  Doers saw something else.

    Doers saw an Alligator Slayer.  But not your average Governor–type Alligator Slayer.  They see Trump as an iconic Great American Alligator Slayer – the type of which has endured for centuries and will continue to endure for centuries more.  He is a supreme Doer, who builds great, tangible and lasting brick and mortar infrastructure, not electronic gadgetry that is obsolete and discarded in 2 years.  To the forgotten Doers Trump said what they had been screaming that no one heard: “We build great things!  That is what we do.  We don’t want hand-outs, we want to do more!”

     

    (Billy Joel released Allentown in 1982 and it applied to the Baby Boomer generation.  Now it applies perfectly to Millennials.  The fact that it is still so applicable 34 years later speaks volumes.)

    When Trump made his ceremonious escalator ride and spoke in the language of Alligator Slayer, he immediately connected with all of the forgotten Doers in America; the people (men and women) who built this country with their hands; the people who see the products of their labor rusting, crumbling and decaying.  Trump spoke and immediately got the attention of every Naturalist who had been ignoring the voice of the Doers.

    Unlike the rest of the management class who proudly announce “I don’t get down in the weeds” Trump said he is willing to get down in the weeds.  His recent refusal or inability to change his language to be more “Presidential” tells the Doers “Now that I’ve gotten what I need from you (votes) I am not like a Politician or your manager who will ride my escalator back up to my big beautiful office.  I am staying down in the weeds.  I am staying in the swamp.  Together we will slay alligators.  Together we will do what we do – we will Make America Great Again.”

     

    Prior to this election cycle I never paid any attention to Trump, his media image or celebrity.  So as the media pundits referred to Trump as a Reality TV star, I kept listening for how Trump referred to himself.  He kept calling himself a Deal Maker.  It means he sees himself as a high level executive who lives in the world of money but his money is always connected to something tangible.  There was a TV show “Let’s Make a Deal” and in that show the deal was connected to what was behind the curtain or in the box.  Doers believe something tangible will result from Trump’s deals even if it is a goat pulling a cart behind the box.  They are willing to take a risk because they see politicians and their policies as taking their money but not even offering a box or a curtain as part of the deal.

    What I find intriguing about Trump is that most men have one trade they specialize in and master.  Trump however is willing to take risks and go into multiple trades.  He went from real estate development into media.  He learned how to not only survive in the Media Swamp but to thrive in it.  He learned how to use it to his advantage.  He mastered the media not just as a marketing ploy but he made it a survival skill.

    Now he is moving on to a new swamp – the Political Swamp.  And he is finding his way and mastering it better than his rivals.

    The media and political Naturalists can say whatever they want about Trump but his supporters don’t care.  To them his critics are the timid souls who don’t get dirty in the swamps and would be eaten alive if they dared venture into the swamp.

    Trump spent his career in the swamps slaying alligators.  Sometimes he lost to the alligators in the swamps but he dragged his beaten body out to find another swamp and more alligators.  Going bankrupt, failed businesses, law suits, being fined and whatever else is dug up are all battle scars.  Faking being your own marketing person is taking something into your own hands to create an advantage.  He did what he had to do to survive and win.  Nothing in his past will diminish him because it proves he has always been in the arena.  It proves he is a fighter and a conqueror.  It proves he is a Great American Alligator Slayer.

    The latest Trump criticism is that he doesn’t have firm policy positions and ideology – no one knows what he stands for. Calling himself a Deal Maker makes politicians nervous because they see him as readily abandoning their precious policy positions that they use to work up their most ardent fans into an emotional frenzy of support.

    Again Doers don’t care because they know that in order to solve problems you have to abandon your position.  You have to brain storm, consider all possibilities.  So when Trump changes his mind on an issue, they interpret it as him examining a problem a different perspective.

    In solving problems, Doers see themselves at point A and they want to get to Point B.  They figure out the best path to get there.  This is different from politics where politicians try to make us believe that their policy positions can get us to where we want to go.  They want us to believe policy positions have magical powers to make things happen the way they want.  But they don’t.

    • Politicians say we are at A but our policy positions dictate we can’t go to B, we must go to C instead – C is the right place to be.  But in the Outside the Beltway Reality, B is the only place you can go.  When politicians take us to C instead they create a slew of new problems they aren’t prepared to deal with.  (Obamacare)
    • Politicians say their policy positions will get us from D to E. But Outside the Beltway Reality says it will take us to Q instead and we will have deal with the unintended consequences.  (Middle East intervention)

     

    Doers get this.   They adamantly believe Trump does too because it is the only way he could of built his empire.

    From a Doer’s tangible perspective Trump is a deal maker who makes deals to secure a project.  The project is then planned out, designed and constructed.  As anyone who has ever worked in construction knows, making money in construction is all about being able to solve problems quickly and effectively all through the course of the project from the initial deal to finishing the punch list.  Doers see Trump’s business success as a testament to his leadership, teamwork, problem solving skills and ability to get things done.

    Doers know Alligator Slayers slay problems.

    This is what the TV pundits didn’t and many still don’t understand.  So as the summer and fall of 2015 unfolded and TV pundits mocked Trump for being clown, I winced.  I knew what was coming.

    45481132_s

     

    TV pundits may claim “Politics is a game of survival” but it isn’t.  It is simply a chess game that you win or lose.  Then you get to play again.

    Real games of survival happen in the swamp and the arena.  And who do you think is the master of survival?

     

    Back in 1991 I deliberately named the workplace Hero The Great American Alligator Slayer in order to describe exactly what he does.   Alligator Slayers are slayers.  They eliminate their problems.  Alligator Slayers don’t just wound.  They go for the kill.  That is how they get all the alligator trophies hanging on their wall.  Great American Alligator Slayers are the supreme hunters and survivors.

    Trump saw his GOP rivals simply as problems to be eliminated.  One-by-one, he hunted them and picked them off.  They were playing chess.  He was playing in the Hunger Games.

    Rick Perry and Carly Fiorina studied hard to take the Presidential entrance exam.  They were eliminated for being Alligator Slayers who switched over to being Naturalists.

    Lindsey Graham hung around to make the point that in order to be Commander in Chief you first have to write a 1,000  word essay explaining the difference between ISIS and ISIL.

    Low Energy Jeb Bush and his super-pac supporters who thought they were big game hunters were revealed to be merely deer hunters.  Killing Bambi’s mother is a far cry from being mud wrestling Alligator Slayers.

    Poor Little Marco Rubio didn’t have any alligator hides on his wall.  Trump told him that he needs to get some first in order to be taken seriously and be seen as a Man.

    Lyin’ Ted Cruz says he is a Constitutional Conservative.  (I have no idea what that means but to me it sounds intellectual and lawyerie.)  He even referenced Philosopher-Kings during a debate, revealing that he is a Naturalist.  But he is also smart enough to understand that we love our men of action and Alligator Slayers.  So being the politician that he is, Cruz wrapped bacon around the barrel of a gun and went duck hunting decked out in full camo.  Really?!  Lyin’ Ted Cruz wanted us to believe he is a great Alligator Slayer by duck hunting?!?!  We were supposed to blindly TrusTed that he is an Alligator Slayer.

    In reality Cruz is the quintessential Conservative Naturalist who holds tighter to a policy position than anyone else in Washington.  He is confused.  Sorry Ted, holding tight to a policy positons isn’t “doing” something.  And no, shutting down the government doesn’t earn you an alligator trophy you can hang on your wall.

    With opponents like these, Trump winning the GOP nomination was inevitable.

     

    Ted Cruz proved to be the best Swamp Wars adversary for Trump.  The last weeks of Cruz’s campaign however were painful to watch because I’ve worked with a lot of men under intense pressure and stress.  For an Alligator Slayer it was like watching a wounded animal slowly die.  I kept thinking “Trump when are you going to put him out of his misery?”  Then Trump made the comment about Cruz’s father.  Holy Sh*t!  I don’t know if Trump intended that to be just another cheap shot (which would be incredibly cruel) or the final fatal blow.  The answer to that says a lot about his character.

    Now Hillary is facing Trump.  I highly recommend she watch the movie Gladiator again.   Trump has already cast himself as Maximus (Russell Crowe).  He defeated 16 other Gladiators and he controls a large portion of the mob.  He is waiting to see whether or not Hillary will come out of the stands and engage him in the arena.  I guarantee that he is ready for whatever she chooses.13847301_s

    She can’t take the high road and refuse to engage except on the debate stage.  Kasich tried that and was drowned out.  TV pundits tell her to take the high road and quote the saying: Never wrestle with pigs.  You both get dirty and the pig likes it.

    This is the wrong analogy.  Doers already know that many Alligator Slayers aren’t the nicest people.  They have huge character flaws but Doers don’t care because getting stuff done is more important.  So this isn’t about rolling in the mud over words, it is about getting down in the weeds of the swamp to slay alligators and get things done.

    Hillary’s campaign slogan “Fighting for Us” really gives her no choice but to get in the arena and fight as a Gladiator.  Her slogan suggests she is an Alligator Slayer or can fight an Alligator Slayer.  She has to prove herself at this level of competition.  And she has to fight by herself.  She can’t rely on her husband, Obama, Elizabeth Warren or a host of other surrogates to engage him for her.  If she does, she will come off looking like Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix).

     

    Hillary has to be careful not to fall into the Commodus role because it plays into the Crooked Hillary name.  In case you haven’t figured out what the name means, it means unethical, immoral, selfish and greedy.  It references back to the person who violates the workplace ethics policy.  In construction it is the guy who awards the paving contract and winds up with a new driveway at his house.  Or the guy who builds a condo complex and suddenly has a newly built summer home.  Doers know who these people are.  And they also know that proving it is really hard because there is no paper trail.  The person making the payoff has to speak up but never will because he got what they wanted.  Crooked people are loathed by hard working Doers.

    I can go on and on about what Hillary is up against.  Not long ago Chris Matthews on Hardball asked his panel what Trump was getting at by the Enabler label.  His panel gave some really poor answers.  They couldn’t explain it because they didn’t know that Alligator Slayers don’t really believe in enabling!  Enabling is one of those simple words that convey paragraphs of meaning.  So Chris, if you want to know, contact me.  I can explain.  I can even explain how Putin ties into it.  (Update:  If Russia did hack the emails, it is because Putin saw Hillary as an “Enabler” and that is the message he was sending.)

    And Hillary needs to figure out what it means because she just played right into it when she announced she was going to put Bill Clinton in charge of the economy.

    Trump fundamentally changed Political Swamp Wars.  He elevated the performance of the Alligator Slayer to a masterful level.  Hillary is no longer up against Alligator Slayer Wanna-be’s like she was in the 11 hour Benghazi hearing.  She is now playing in the Super Bowl of Swamp Wars.

    Last night I heard Hillary was looking for help to prepare for the debates against Trump.  Hmmm… I speak Alligator Slayer fluently.  And I was trained by Great American Alligator Slayers so I know how they play.  Hillary, maybe we should talk.

    Or if any TV pundits out there need me to interpret Alligator Slayer speak, let me know…

    Or Trump, if you need a woman to translate for you to keep you out of trouble…I have lots and lots of experience!…And BTW  I have an alligator trophy the size of Jaws.

     

    Update November 9, 2016

     

    Trump won this round of Swamp Wars.  In the process he blew up both the Republican and Democratic parties.  Does this mean he ended Swamp Wars once and for all?

    Time will tell.

    If he can get a stagnant government moving, get the economy growing and help bring financial security to American families he will elevate the status of Doers.  If he can help all Americans learn what it feels like to achieve, to have great accomplishments or in his words “to win” he will inspire us to return to being a nation of Doers and Achievers.

    We have forgotten that we are a nation of Achievers.  As Swamp Wars escalated, we became a nation of words.  We gave words power and made them more important than taking action and doing.  We became of nation of protesters, debaters, pundits and lawyers arguing one side of a case thinking that if we won the argument we accomplished something great.  But winning an argument doesn’t create anything tangible on its own.  We still need to act and to do.

    I hope that Trumps leads us back to being a nation of Achievers and all Americans get to experience the pride and joy that comes from accomplishing something the naysayers said they couldn’t or even better, something they didn’t think they could.

    If Trump can Drain the Swamp (solve our problems) and end Swamp Wars permanently by making us a nation of Achievers, again, we will Make America Great Forever and once again be a Great Inspiration to the rest of the world.

    A Personal Note (part of  original post):

    After a career working with thousands of blue collar white, black and Hispanic Doers, I learned that Doers judge, respect and value people based upon how hard they try, how hard they work, how safely they work and what they get done.  If their colleague is a good, safe hard worker they do not care if they are black, Hispanic, Asian, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a woman, gay, educated, uneducated, covered in tattoos and piercings or is a man wearing a dress.

    That was one of the  first lessons I learned about the male-dominated workplace.  Understanding that was critical to my success as a woman in a traditionally hard-core male role.  All I had to do to be respected and accepted was do my job well.  And I did, I did it extremely well.

    I also learned that even though many Doers are brusque, poor communicators and seemingly unemotional, they give an abundance of time and energy to others.  It is often the most outwardly gruffest  who are genuine Teddy Bears who unselfishly give the most.  They:

    • Give up their family Thanksgiving every year to cook and serve provide Thanksgiving dinner to their community low income families and the homeless.
    • Build homes for Habitat for Humanity and renovate homes for disabled vets, the elderly and the poor.
    • Buy Toys for Tots and personal items for the forgotten elderly in nursing homes at Christmas.
    • Make up the volunteer Fire Department, community patrols and Search and Rescue teams.  They can be counted on to respond in any emergency.
    • Actively belong to any number of charitable organizations doing good works benefiting the less fortunate, sick and needy in their community.
    • Mentor young women in the male-dominated workplace and promote their careers,

    Doers make a difference because they value making a difference above all else.

    This is a concept that is either unknown, long forgotten or ignored by politicians, political wanna-be’s, media pundits and many in the C-suite that has brought our workplaces, society and politics to where we are now.  While some believe it will take an “Outsider” to change this,  in my first Swamp Wars article I state that the only way to end Swamp Wars is for women to empower and assert their female traits.

    There is no magical political or business Hero or Heroine who will arise from inside or outside “the establishment” and do it for us.

    Change and action will only happen when women assert themselves as Doers on par with men.  That is when we will create the balance and wholeness that transforms workplaces, society and politics into what we want them to be.    

     

    To subscribe to receive my articles Contact Me

    Follow The Woman In The Room On facebook

  • Why the Male-Dominated Workplace Doesn’t Teach Employees to Problem Solve

    There are days at work when I am just overwhelmed by the long line of people outside my door, all with problems we need to solve. In my frustration I think, “Do I have to solve everybody’s  problems for them?!  Can’t you guys solve problems yourselves?”

    Twenty years ago, when I had fewer responsibilities, I liked solving problems, any one’s problems.  I found it challenging.  But as a manager supervising nearly a dozen people, I fantasize about employees who come to me and tell me how they successfully took care of a major problem on their own. Since this has been a recurring problem for years and across several workplaces, I used to think that the problem was me – I was a perfectionist control freak, But the sad truth was, that wasn’t the issue. The problem is that most of my employees genuinely do not know how to solve problems. And digging even deeper, I found I had to give them permission to think.

    What the heck is going on?

    In the past couple of years, I’ve been discovering the answer.  It seems in many companies only certain people are allowed to think.  Only certain people can make decisions.  Only certain people can “think strategically” which I discovered is considered the highest level of thinking.  The directive is simple – they think, you act.  Thinking and doing are separate and distinct and never done by the same people.

    I am also learning that construction has been a little slow in adopting this concept. It seems this philosophy is well entrenched in some industries and it has a name – Taylorism.

    I’ve written about Taylor before and how his philosophies shaped the workplace.  Basically, Taylor at the beginning of the industrial revolution decided there would be experts who decided the best method for doing work.  The experts designed the methods for the working man to carry out.  The working man was supposed to park his brain at the door and follow the directive of the expert.  Early in my career I thought we were evolving past this – we wanted a thinking workforce.  But it seems we made a U turn and Taylorism has met Intellectualism and created Elitism.

    So what do we get?  A new corporate hierarchy!!

    At the lowest rung are all those blue collar guys.  You know those guys who work with their hands because they weren’t “smart enough” to get into college.

    Then there are the office people who may have tried college but didn’t make it.

    Next rung is your basic state college or unknown private university graduate.

    Then comes the management levels who have to deal with all those lower people.

    Next there is a big gap.  Think of a moat.  Filled with alligators.

    The gap separates and distinguishes the corporate level.  I think this is what they are talking about when they say “the C level.”  I’ve heard this term thrown around with a resounding air of snobbery and I don’t know what it really means.  I just know that we are to be impressed by its exclusivity. But anyway, on this side of the moat, we start a new ladder.

    At the bottom are the people who interact with the management of the working and undereducated workforce.  As the management of the undereducated working class you are only allowed to talk to these people in the corporate level.  It doesn’t matter that you have more degrees, certifications or experience.  It doesn’t matter that this low level C person has no concept of the work being done, that’s not his job.  His job is to act as a buffer between the regular management and executive management – so executive management doesn’t have to get down in the weeds, get their hands dirty.

    The senior executive level is filled with people who have long titles.  Everyone is a vice-president and some are Senior VP’s, others Executive VP’s, and still others Senior Executive VP’s.  What distinguishes them?  I have absolutely no idea!!

    Does this sound a little over-the-top and cynical?  A year ago, I would have told you it is.  But not today.

    As I mentioned in my last article, I was on webinars with world-renown consultants trying to teach senior managers how to develop their people.  According to the consultants, it is a manager’s responsibility to train people and teach them how to think and problem solve.  But there was resistance by men on the call.

    And as I mentioned in my last article, one of the things you do in problem solving is ask “why.”  So the consultant asked why – why did so many men on the webinar resist the concept of training the workforce to problem solve?

    Because the average worker wouldn’t come up with as good of an answer.

    Dare I ask “Why?”

    Because they didn’t go to college.

    Why?

    Because they aren’t as smart.

    Shall I continue with another –Why?

    Because they aren’t as genetically gifted as me.

    So why don’t we just say it – a lot of the men on the webinar believed they were better than the average working man.  Going to college made them better.  Going to a prestigious university instead of a state university made them better.  The expansive separation between them and actual work made them better.

    Remember the male-dominated workplace is where men can establish their status in the world.  And education has emerged as a great discriminator of status. So, if the average working man without a college diploma could solve work problems on his own, then how does the C level employee or manager distinguish himself?  What criteria does he use to establish his status?

    So, why don’t we teach our employees to think and problem solve?

    Because it would ruin the new hierarchy we have been working diligently to establish since Taylor came up with his concepts early in the industrial revolution.

    But we aren’t in the industrial revolution anymore – it is time to evolve again. As women in the male-dominated workplace we need to lead the workplace past this newfound elitism. We need to lead in teaching our employees to think and be problem solvers. Our focus for work is not to establish our personal status but to improve the performance of our teams. That is how you win at work.

    Empowered Women Discourage Elitism By Teaching Everyone to Think

  • How To Energize The Dull Male-Dominated Workplace

    Let’s admit it – the male-dominated workplace can be pretty dull. This is one of the reasons I liked being out on a construction site – we had a lot more fun!  We worked hard and had fun doing it.  On site, we weren’t trying to impress anyone with a corporate image like we had to in the main office.  In the main office you have to present a “professional” image at all times in case a Client stopped by and made it past the main lobby, conference room and senior offices and got lost in the far back recesses where our offices were located.  (more…)

  • A Blue Zone “Motivational” Letter

    I came across a letter that I want to share with women.  This letter is VERY Blue Zone and meant to inspire the overwhelmingly male managers within the company to achieve the 2013 financial goals.  I am curious as to women’s reaction to this letter.  Does it inspire you?

    This is the actual letter – I have not changed much – I left out the company name and specific financial information.  But I did keep in all the exclamation points!     (more…)