In case we hadn’t heard enough about Sheryl Sandberg’s new
book…
In a recent speech (also covered here),
Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, author of the new controversial novel Lean In, discussed her career success –
and that part of it could be attributed to crying at the workplace. While
making a plea for business leaders to be empathetic, and get to know “the real
you”, she said the following:
“I’ve cried at work. I've told people I've cried at work.
And it's been reported in the press that Sheryl Sandberg cried on Mark
Zuckerberg's shoulder, which is not exactly what happened. I talk about my hopes
and fears and ask people about theirs. I try to be myself. Honest about my
strengths and weaknesses and I encourage others to do the same. It is all
professional and it is all personal, all at the very same time.”
I found this idea to be in intriguing on a few levels, but
mainly on the level of female identity, both in its appearance and within self.
While Ms. Sandberg has been “able” to cry at work – why is this something that
needs to be discussed with women, specifically? Or is this something more specific
to Ms. Sandberg’s career, something that cannot necessarily be applied to every
woman’s working world? Another novel published two years ago by Kelly Cutrone,
a PR exec infamous on reality TV for her mentorship of Lauren Conrad, has also
addressed this issue, in the title alone: If
You Have to Cry, Go Outside. The book goes into detail about how crying
should not be at the workplace, that it is personal and should not be something
associated with your professional identity.
So whose perception is more valid? Which identity is better?
This also made me think of the case we read about Sarah
Palin, who in the television coverage during the first week of her Vice
Presidential run, had her identity represented in a variety of ways. As Harp
et.al explained, “While Palin at times performs and is constructed as
masculine, Palin’s gender is normalized (feminized) as her masculine
performance is mixed with a normative feminine identity. The indication is that
women are allowed to be tough as long as they continue to fit stereotypical notions
of femininity” (305). This hybrid identity can be applied to women as well in
the workplace – crying when appropriate, when it feels necessary, or
comfortable, and when a woman accepts that it may then be associated with her
at work.
Women today face many identity issues, especially in the
working world, and in the end, a hybrid identity looks like it is the best
option for women to maintain their success – but what can be done about this
culture in the workplace?
Hey Callyn, good topic. A friend of my recently sent me an article about why its good to cry at work...similar to what Sandberg has to say. But I actually wonder why Sandberg has been at the topic of discussion so much lately. It makes me wonder who her PR people and what they're really pushing. I would love to see their communications plan for promoting this book, because it appears that this book is really targeted towards working women. But maybe women in their 40s? Or those women who have "broken through the glass ceiling." I'm not sure, but it's fun to think about. Here is the article from the San Francisco Gate that says crying at work is a good thing: http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Crying-at-the-office-can-be-a-healthy-thing-3677766.php
ReplyDelete