Women Need to Make Decisions

So I've been riding high in my "I am Woman hear me roar" saddle recently. I went to a fantastic Forte Foundation conference in New York a few weeks ago (put on for women who are interested in Financial Services-- i-bankers galore!), I'm working in my firm on a "New Mom's Program", to bring in young mothers and (hopefully) provide a little guidance on starting a career, becoming a professional and generally just giving a little girl-to-girl advice, and I've been meeting (and being inspired by/ re-inspired by) a lot of the great women in my industry and my future b-school.

So, when I read the article by Slaughter "Why Women Still Can't Have It All" , I took it with a grain of salt. In the article, for those who haven't gotten to read it (it's fairly long and we're all busy, so I get it) it's basically a reflection on this woman's life. A very successful woman in politics, she begins to reflect on how, for a very long time now, women have been indoctrinated into this mentality that you can have it all-- that you can balance a family and work and an active social life, that you can be a successful, sought-after employee while simultaneously be a fantastic mother/spouse/significant other....and don't forget to be thin and beautiful too. In her article, Slaughter points to many of the discussions that have currently popped up in this venue, most notably Sheryl Sandberg's "Don't Lean Back" tough-love talk she gave at TED and then again at Barnard commencement. Sheryl's points were that not enough women were making it in the world today-- a disproportionate number if you look at education rates. She attributed it to women "leaving before they left"-- planning for children they didn't have, looking to please a husband when they didn't have a boyfriend. Slaughter's article boiled Sheryl's talk down to "What's wrong with us?! If you want it bad enough, reach out and take it" type mentality.

Slaughter's article is provoking, if nothing else. She basically argues that it's not that simple. You CAN have it all, but there are certain prices to pay. Women are going to continue to drop out of the race so long as we live in a culture that makes us choose between family and work. Particularly those with children (she main argument seems to be how difficult it is for women with children), it's a non-starter-- the older the children get, the more women realize how much they're missing and the more difficult it is to justify what you do for what you're missing. It makes sense.

Then I read this article by HBS grad, "Can Women Have It All? Remarkable Women Weigh In...", Sonia Kapadia. Like me, she reads the article and decides to do a little real-time sleuthing. She emails women that she considers to be very successful- HBS and MIT grads abound, most of them (it sounds like) with children and all of them holding high powered jobs in what can only be assumed to be Fortune 500 by their anonymous titles ("Senior Executive at Beauty Corporation"). She expects that most of them will write back, "Yes-- I can and do have it all...!", but unfortunately the responses she gets are more along the lines of "I don't think women can have it all... it may be impossible". These women cite the same things-- missing out on their children's lives, the incompatibility of basic scheduling (work day vs. school day) and the tediousness of traveling (for conferences, on the weekend, during school plays, etc.) all has its tolls. Some of the women she reached out to were either thinking of leaving the workforce to care for children or were already out.

I believe all of these points of view are true. But I'm angry because all arguments seem to focus on children, so what about the young 20-somethings that are still trying to figure it out? If it's children that are holding women back, does that imply that 20-somethings should be able to grab life by the horns, step on the gas and try to get as far ahead while they still can? From experience, let me fall back on the tried-and-true consultant answer. It depends.

Let's just use me as an example of a 20-something. You're consulting. You're not home much. When you ARE home, you're a stressed out mess. Add anything else-- buying a condo, starting business school, etc.-- and you get a lot of nights where you can't sleep for all the anxiety and worrying that you have. You get to know your bedroom ceiling really well. I consider myself fairly successful in my career thus far. My peers respect me, my managers like to work with me, I have been considered a top performer for several years now. Has it come at a cost? Yes. And this is a cost that you don't just pay in stress units or pounds (I stress eat, okay? Leave me alone.) but in emotional damage too. So, this won't be a "toolkit for how to survive" because even with the following you might not. This is more of a "If you want a shot in hell at surviving...these things are critical".

1.       Be comfortable with who you are.  Seems self explanatory. Part of this is knowing who you are, which is hard enough. But you have to be okay with it. Me? I know I am anal retentive. I expect a lot out of people, but I also expect a lot out of myself. I don't like tardiness, and I get really stressed out if it happens around me. I internalize emotions. I like to put everyone else first, often at the expense of myself. I am guarded around people I don't trust, and it takes awhile for me to trust people. Bottom line? I'm aggressive, but I overanalyze everything, and am incredibly sensitive if I feel that I am not pleasing everyone around me. I'm working on it.

2.      Have a good partner. Ahhh yes. All women cite this one. The best decision you make they say is the one you make in choosing your life partner. And they really should be a partner. But let me point out something they don't often mention. When choosing your partner, take into account who will be the primary breadwinner. Not only are some men very sensitive about NOT being the primary, but if they AREN'T, that will deeply affect the choices you can make. The men I've been with have not been the primary, but have provided for me in other ways-- emotionally, organizationally, by providing stability, etc. In turn, you have to accept that you will not have a lot of options. You will work longer, harder, and need to worry more about security in your job because you are now essentially providing for someone else. If I had lost my job, we wouldn't be able to pay rent. In addition, be prepared to try to provide the lifestyle you think your other deserves, just know it's sometimes very expensive. However, ALSO prepare yourself in the event that it doesn't work out for relatively hurtful words-- despite all the work you've put in. One of my exes and I were talking the other day and off-handedly he sarcastically said, "Yeah, you totally weren't a complete psycho or anything while we were dating-- always stressed out of your mind. I totally didn't mind living by myself while you travelled for work every week for 4 years. You were totally normal to live with." Extremely hurtful? Yes. Kind of unnecessary? Yes. True? Also yes. Those are words I'll never forget.

3.      Become good at prioritizing. And reprioritizing. And reprioritizing.... Part of this is identifying what things you need to prioritize. Then knowing in both the short term and long term what the consequences are of your prioritization. You'll need to teach yourself to think in more "web-like" (following multiple decision points until termination to define what the consequences of your choices would be) instead of linearly.

4.      Be great at nothing OR be great at one thing at a time. You can't be great at all things all the time. So you make a choice. Be great at nothing and be good at a lot of things OR pick one thing to be great at and focus on one thing at a time. This is going to be purely driven by preference and style. In my experience, I've done both, and it'll depend on the situation.

Those are the only four that I've seen hold true throughout. Of course there are others "Make time for yourself", "Know when to be selfish" and blah blah blah, but let's be honest. Those are definitively on the back burner when you're trying to have it all.

That's a Euro Rap vs.That's a Gyro Wrap

Puns! Okay, no seriously.. I know I've been remiss in posting. But work is truly trying to kill me with tediousness-- leaving me listless and sad. To solve both problems.. I want to recap the events happening in Greece right now... in rap. So drop a beat.

The NDP held parliament elections on Sunday,

Didn't get the memo that it was supposed to be a Funday,

They agreed that it was time to their ish in straight,

Bringing austerity and euro zone together before Germany checkmates,

'Cause the New Democracy Party is hoping to stay in the euro zone party,

Hoping to slip through like an underage-- "Don't card me!"

That crazy guy Samaras --was a victory for all Europe he said (he said),

But that guy Tsipras wants to disregard because the people gotta be fed,

His argument is there's more than one way to skin a cat,

But it's a pity when you can't figure out where the kitty is at,

Maybe instead discard the agreement,

Start over with a leftist coalition that really means it,

There's not much more to austere he claims,

Better to slow down a country than make it lame...

But what about the G20--what do they think?

They can clearly see that the zone's on the brink,

And what if everything were to crash and fall?

Well then inflation would rise, interest would plummet and this recovery we've been seeing? ...Wouldn't happen at all.

So our situation right now is a bit precarious,

These deep budget cuts to the people--nefarious!

But there's more politicking to come, I see,

Pasok is thinking about joining New Democracy,

As another party it's the Panhellenic Socialist Movement,

Trying to figure out where the country's groove went,

Typically they go with the NPD,

And if they side with them they'll bailout--just maybe,

But Pasok without Syriza won't play,

Syriza doesn't want to continue cutting like NPD's trying today,

Community members all seem to agree,

'Cause they don't care what happens in elections as long as they can be,

That means no cutting of public funds -- they can't lie,

Before this problem started their unemployment was sky high.

For Europe overall, what do we fear?

How do we know what's real from all that we hear?

A lot of uncertainty happens there and roils and rolls,

For all the years of irresponsibility is just the toll?

What about the other PIGs? Will Spain fall too?

What about global FIs, are they holding debt that belongs in the loo?

So what about us here in the states?

What are we looking for, what decisions to make?

Well the president is keeping an eye on all directions,

His main concern is how it affects re-elections,

He's already battling tense feelings with Putin-- even though no hard feelings are meant,

And his country is still flailing-- the reports are a bit ambivalent,

On top of this all he's facing the same election problems de novo,

That's "again" for the non-Brazilians so let's go,

It's taxes, immigration and education,

Energy investment, natural disasters and medication,

Unemployment, growth and inflation,

His billion dollar bet didn't do much for job creation,

It's consumer confidence, family values and such that,

People can see him as a dependable guy who doesn't react,

But plans for the country, looks to the future and is honest,

Hope is what those posters promised.

Props to Da Timez and The W P-Sizzle

To Square, or Not to Square. That Is the Dongle.

Okay okay. I get it. Square is sexy. It's one of those gadgets that make you pause and reflect-- thank god that you live in the 21st century. I'm right there with you. In fact, I just had one of those moments the other day when I found a highlighter that had sticky notes hidden inside of it in a little, secret compartment that you slide open. It made me proud to live in the time that I live in-- we have Pinterest, planking, Modern Family and little highlighters that also help you tag pages in a book. These are truly glorious times.

Square is sexy. I get it. It's business model is slightly revolutionary in that it's bringing mobile payments to a completely new niche that, although small in volume (typically less than $50k in annual volume), constitutes a large part of the overall market (issuers estimate that the "small" or "micro-business" contingency is actually 70% or more of the overall market share). This little white dongle, it can be argued, has allowed an unprecedented formalization of small business and has allowed entrepreneurs true access to (relatively) sophisticated, critical payment processing tools for a fraction of the cost.

Square has also grown at a terrifyingly fast pace. In a recent article released by TechCrunch, Square announced they would be landing in approximately 20k stores nationwide. Originally popping up at large, common, big box stores (FedEx, WalGreens, Staples) they are now expanding into Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Apple Stores, Radioshack and Target. They estimate that they have over 1 million customers and process over $5B annually. Their business model is summed up in three prongs: the readers for ipad, iphone and android devices, Register (an app for the iStore) and Pay With Square (a point of sale option that allows users to pay by saying their name to the cashier). They have a valuation of $4B. Impressive numbers for the hobby start-up of Jack Dorsey. What does this all mean though?

In my humble opinion, this is what I think:

• If nothing else, Square should be used as a case study of excellent marketing and brand management. This is a company that is STILL in the red, just because of all the up-front investment that they needed to make. However, by staying on the "bleeding edge" of innovation and continually signing deals with high profile partners (Apple, for one) they have been able to continually stay relevant in the tech scene and continue to expand their reach and get buy in from the general populous. Saying that they're "masters of hype" would be dramatically undermining all of the work they've done, but it also wouldn't be completely inaccurate either
• As an offshoot of the above, their focus on maintaining relevancy also indicates their (very justified) worry on maintaining hegemony as others begin to encroach on their space. Intuit, Vantiv, Verifone and many others have all developed their own dongle solutions. Some, like PayPal, come armed with a lot of experience in the alternative payments space and with a significant, existing market base. Although they are fast followers, there is something to be said about letting someone else do all of the QA for you
• Judging by their newest partners (Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Apple, Radioshack, Target), I think it's clear that they've realized the true value of marketing their dongle as a consumer product. This is only a shade different than their original positioning of small-business technology, but it does indicate they are moving aggressively into micro-business and they know that they've realized a large majority of their transactions are coming from service industry entrepreneurs (local, neighborhood plumbers, contractors, etc.) and individuals (baby sitters, interior designers, etc.) as much as formal "businesses"
• For the future-- Square will most likely continue to be quite popular, but they will need to begin developing additional solutions (by targeting niche or expanding their service offerings into new products) in order to continue generating revenue. The closer the dongle market gets to saturation, the less likely Square will be able to compete when they're known as "the dongle guys". I expect that in order to branch out and grow, Square will begin partnering with more high-profile partners, but probably ones with more of a hardware/software technology focus (think HTC, Amazon or Google) or perhaps even with emerging loyalty solutions (like Belly in Chicago) to create a more compelling value prop

Time will tell! Until then, I will continue to see more Square updates in my inbox tomorrow...