Managing Leadership^®

Tomorrow, I’ll be offering a review of Off-ramps and On-Ramps, by Sylvia Ann Hewlett. I’m recommending the book, and you’ll learn why when I post the review. There are two issues that came to mind while reading it, however. One, dealing with the use of statistics to bolster - or even build - an argument, is discussed briefly within the review.

The other has to do with the overall discussion of women at work. Hewlett does a really terrific job explaining, from a purely demographic standpoint, why they need to be there, and how the traditional concept of a career needs to be modified to accommodate them.

What I would like to see more of, however, is a discussion of the unique strengths women, in general, bring to the core demands of management.

There is a lot of pressure to maintain the basis of the argument as solely an issue of fairness, and the denial of that to women. There is a lot of power in this argument, and some headway for women at work has been made through its use.

But, just as in any field, from politics to business, it’s not enough. What counts in the end is the marketplace, whether of ideas or commerce.

After all, who can determine what “fair” is, in the larger scheme of things? Indeed, the debates about this are often all the more confusing because people are contesting with each other on the same stage, and even using the same jargon, but are arguing from positional frameworks that are miles apart. (Please see here for an elaboration of this in the context of “Karma Capitalism“)

The mechanism that settles the debate is simple: the market. When it’s all said and done, it is inescapably and indisputably about what people do. So, we should simply let this issue be resolved in the marketplace, right?

Well, the problem with that is, as John Keynes said, “In the long run, we are all dead.” He was referring to the problem with waiting passively for market forces to clear, leading to a proper balance of supply and demand. Sometimes, these forces can get stuck, and sometimes elements or information key to their functioning are unavailable, keeping them stuck for unsustainably long periods. Consequently, on occasion you may have to simply intervene in the pure operation of capitalism, just to get it to work while we are still alive to enjoy its results.

In my view, that’s where the fairness argument comes in: as a temporary expedient, pushing the issue forward until all the factors and information unfold and are available to take their roles in the debate.

But it’s those additional factors and information that I’m most interested in. And, I think they will be making their presence felt soon.

I’m going to take the occasion of the review of Hewlett’s fine book this week to discuss this issue a bit. I hope you’ll join in.

—

Please be sure to see all the posts in this series:

1. Women at work
2. Book Review: Off-Ramps and On-Ramps
3. Why a women’s place is in the corner office
4. Forest for the trees
5. Roundup: Women at work

—

Thanks for stopping by, today. If you enjoyed your visit, please take a moment to subscribe, so you can visit again in the future from the convenience of your email client or RSS reader.

Technorati Tags: Sylvia Ann Hewlett, statistics, women at work, management, fairness, marketplace, John Keynes, market forces, supply and demand, capitalism