The New Debate Over ‘Having It All’
By Robin Madell (San Francisco)
The cover story of this month’s issue of The Atlantic, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All,” went viral in the first week after its publication. In the controversial article, Princeton University professor and former high-level State Department official Anne-Marie Slaughter reignites a decades-old debate about whether women can have both a successful career and a family.
Slaughter asks if women of her own demographic—“highly educated, well-off women who are privileged enough to have choices in the first place”—can successfully “have it all” as both parents and professionals. The author’s premise is that “the women who have managed to be both mothers and top professionals are superhuman, rich, or self-employed.” In other words, the article suggests that the answer to the often-asked question, “Can women have it all?” is a clear “No” for most women under normal circumstances.
The explosion of media response to this story reveals what women in every position and life situation already knew: that the “having it all” debate is far from over. The Glass Hammer surveyed some of the varied responses to the story to bring you up to speed on the issues.
From Pillar to Post…
In The Boston Globe, Cathy Minehan, dean of Simmons School of Management, weighed in. (Simmons is the only business school in the U.S. designed for women.) Minehan notes that the topic of “having it all” arises frequently among women of all levels. The challenges touch both their students—who are already starting to feel the pressure of the job/family juggle—as well as those who participate in the college’s corporate women’s leadership programs.
Yet despite the pervasive nature of work-life issues touching wide ranks of women, Minehan suggests that it’s those further down the ladder who actually suffer from the imbalance the most. While much of the discussion in the wake of Slaughter’s article has revolved around executive women, Minehan points out that it’s often those not in senior management roles who feel greater strain from layoffs and high unemployment rates.
Lynne Sarikas, director of Northeastern University’s MBA Career Center, agrees that it’s important to consider those lower on the ladder as well. “This article is by a very well-educated, well-compensated individual with a supportive spouse,” she says. “If it is difficult for her to ‘have it all,’ then what are the chances for middle income or even lower income women to even have a chance?” Sarikas emphasizes that women who lack proper education will have more limited options and fewer choices—and will often have to work harder and longer hours just to make ends meet.
…But One at a Time
Trying to have it all can be exhausting and stressful. Sarikas notes that it is not safe to assume all women (or men) dream of being in senior management. “I was tired reading the article just thinking about the weekly commute from New Jersey to DC, working long hours all week in DC with a lot of travel, and then cramming all the other aspects of normal life into the weekends at home,” admits Sarikas. She notes that some women will make career decisions that offer them more predictable and flexible schedules to balance their work-life responsibilities.
Minehan says she believes the concept of “having it all” is misplaced. “If you define ‘having it all’ to include a vibrant family and personal life outside of work as a successful professional, I doubt that anyone has it all, male or female—that is, all at the same time,” says Minehan. Yet Elle Kaplan, CEO and founding partner of Lexion Capital Management LLC, believes Slaughter’s premise that only rich superhumans can have it all is self-defeating. “If you tell yourself you can’t ‘have it all,’ frankly, you never will,” says Kaplan.
Minehan explains that she thinks of her life as having four compartments: work, family, community, and personal. Her goal is to try to occupy one compartment or another fully at any point in time—but move from one compartment to another as necessary. “I often find that when things in one compartment are particularly troubling and require more time, things in the other compartments are relatively calm, though blow-ups in two or three simultaneously can be very trying,” she admits.
As she’s moved from one career to another, Minehan says she can see in retrospect that given a long and healthy life, one can achieve career success in multiple areas and still have had the joy of a family. But she acknowledges that some of this simply comes with time. “Trying to force it all at the same time does not work in my estimation,” she says.
The Anti-Perfect
A related question in the context of the challenges that Slaughter describes is whether a woman can achieve the pinnacle of success in business, government, or academia while having anything left for life and family outside of work. Minehan suggests that this depends on prioritization (for example, whether a woman waits until she has a solid reputation before having children), and on organization of one’s personal life (for example, by having good household help and/or an accommodating spouse).
However, Kaplan suggests that the necessary adaptations should not come entirely from women—they should come from companies and their policies. “The change on the corporate end is much too slow,” says Kaplan. “Workplace policies need to evolve, and women must begin to expect and demand that these things change to fit the economic realities of life in 2012 for working women and mothers.”
Leveling the playing field may take large shifts not just in personal decisions and corporate policies, but in societal norms as well. Karen Mallia, an associate professor at the University of South Carolina, notes that the ambitious, perfectionist woman is set up for failure when she cannot be a “perfect” wife and mother as well.
Mallia points to another recent controversial cover story—Time magazine’s “Are You Mom Enough?” which shows a three-year-old breastfeeding—as an example of this. “If the ‘perfect’ mother must grow her own organic vegetables, make her own baby food, and breastfeed a child till she’s three, she can’t be an executive with a 70-hour work week full of meetings, decision-making, and business travel,” explains Mallia. “If ‘having it all’ is possible, it is only for the woman who has a household income big enough to hire a ‘wife’—someone to take primary responsibility for the children, the home, and having a healthy dinner ready when you get home,” says Mallia. “That is a luxury for a very small minority.”
Mallia emphasizes that many women walk away from career opportunities because they know their physical and emotional limits, thus limiting their career progression—which often bears the additional consequence of stunting their family’s financial resources. “Women often turn down promotions that require heavy travel or relocation based on the needs of their families,” adds Sarikas. “Financial well-being affords more choices than workers struggling to make ends meet will have. Often those in most need of some flexibility or support are the ones who can’t afford it.”
Statistics show that women as a group compared to men do 70–80 percent of all household work, and Mallia notes that most married women in the U.S. who work full-time still do the majority of the other work it takes to run a family. “They have primary responsibility for getting kids to school and activities, for shopping, cooking, and cleaning,” she says. “It’s impossible to do two full-time jobs well.”
Full Circle
So can women have it all? It’s 2012, and the jury is still out on the debate that began 40 years ago, when the feminist movement first started gaining strength.
Sarikas suggests that women who perpetuate the myth that you can have it all if you just work hard enough do a disservice to all women. “Young women need to hear a more realistic report from successful women who have worked hard to manage both a successful career and a family,” says Sarikas. “Women need to acknowledge the trade-offs they have made for success in all aspects of their lives. It is only by being honest that we can prepare younger women for their own success, however they define it.”
Amid all of the controversy, until work-life solutions become more universally institutionalized, there is yet some hope—not that everyone can do everything, but that in some cases, there may be answers for individuals who seek them. “I think that there is a degree of perfectionism that is the enemy of rational solutions to balancing the demands of life and work,” says Minehan. “Things will not be perfect all the time; they can’t be. But if you try to be in the moment—the compartment, if you will—and focused on the task whether it be at home, at work, in your community, or at the gym, I think that success is possible.”
Society has defined “having it all” and women are falling for it.
I have a book that will be out soon and in it I will be discussing just this subject and how it is better to define what it is you want.
Superwoman was tried by many and it just didn’t work.
Now a days people want to be happy.
Having it all means different things to different people.
I agree with Debbie. Each of us must first be clear about how we define having it all rather than opting into the idea that having it all is a commonly held definition. Many people who strive to have it all, achieve much and then find that it was achieved at a cost they never intended to pay.
I could spend 100% of my time and focus on any one of the “compartments” of my life. They are all important and all parts of who Iam.
It’s my job to stay in balance. Sometimes something slides so I can rock something else. That’s reality. But I own two things: 1.) knowing what is important at that moment or time period and 2.) asking for what I need (even if it’s forgiveness once in a while!).
Thanks Robin for rolling up all of the perspectives in this blog.
Kelli (@kelligizzi)
I agree with all the comments above. Like Debbie I have a book coming out in September — I interviewed 14 highly successful women. Here’s what they said about work-life integration (a word most preferred over “balance): 1. Establish your goals and define your priorities; 2. Realize that life is long and you don’t have to have everything at the same time; 3. Realize you don’t have to do everything yourself; 4. Build networks of personal support; 5. Don’t forget to take care of yourself.
if men were more helpful in the house, then women could have the same opportunity and have it all. it is all up to husbands. the onus is on them.
Do men have it all?
Don’t get me wrong: I totally agree that it’s very difficult for women to have it all. And I’m not meaning to defend men.
However, inspired by the article I’ve started looking at the lives of men around me, and my conclusion is: men don’t have it all either! Only: they pretend to do. And: society makes it a lot easier for them to get away with this big lie.
What I mean is this: look at all those managers with their wives looking after the kids. Those men travel the world, they come home late at night, they don’t see much of their children, they don’t know much about their children. It’s basically the fact that they have a wife looking after their children that makes their world appear intact and functional.
But I think, this is just a big smoke screen. And since women have started entering the higher levels of management they’ve started to question this way of life, making it appear to be a women’s issue.
I say: it’s a problem inherent in the way our societies are organised. The problem is that our modern (Western) life needs restructuring. And women are the ones who see this need and are not happy living lies, because it’s the women who want it all.
Actually, I sometimes doubt it whether men in general even “want it all” the way most women do. I think many men – due to the way their brains work – are happy focussing on only one portion of it all, i.e. their careers.
So my conclusion is that “having it all” is a basically female thing, and I hope that more and more women will succeed in having it all, thus changing society to the better.
Best
Barbara (from Vienna)
As long as we keep debating the “having it all” dilemma as a “womans” issue it will remain the responsibility for women to resolve what in effect is an issue for men AND women and all couples (heterosexual or gay) who are trying to balance work and family life. Support for single parents (male and female) in the “having it all debate”should also be considered. Couples and single parents need to think how to resolve this issue TOGETHER and/or with significant other relatives as ultimately everyone is affected by the work/life balance issue in terms of quality of relationships, time for partner/family, benefits of those who are working in achieving well for the lifestyle of all in the family, and overall well-being. It is encouraging that in recent years quite a few of the large corporate organisations I work with have begun to take an interest in the approach and asked me to run my “Synergise your Career and Relationship” workshop which provides coaching tips for couples to negotiate a work/life balance for THEIR life together. In my view organisations could think about doing more in offering support for this dilemma as ultimately a fulfilling home life supports good performance at work.
Debbie stated my feelings exactly. Why do we still ask this question: Could WOMEN have it all? Why no one ever asked if MEN could have it all? That is the exact problem! I dream that there will be the day when women could decide for themselves what “all” means and not feel guilty, conflicted. I always was able to make that decision for myself and as a result was able to make a carrier and raise two daughters. And always felt happy with either side of that equation – because those were my choices. I think we should start teaching children (and specially girls) this type of philosophy. The world will be a better place as a result!
If having a challenging career and a family is “having it all” than yes it is possible… but ONLY if you accept that you can’t be perfect and you can’t do everything, let alone do everything at the same time. (Besides killing yourself, trying to be perfect is no fun!)
First and foremost, having a career & family requires TEAMWORK – a team at home and a team in the office. A team in the office, simply means prioritizing, delegating and communicating to get the job done/the problem solved. A team at home includes the partner, the kids, the school, and childcare providers/grandparents/neighbors (whoever helps with the kids.
Whenever anyone asks me how I became managing director in financial services and raise 3 kids, I say “I, didn’t do it. The TEAM did it”.
It may be too late for those of us in our forties to find balance, but as Sarikas stated, “Young women need to hear a more realistic report from successful women who have worked hard to manage both a successful career and a family.” It is the responsiblity of those of us who have lived through the stress of trying to have it all at the same time to mentor up and coming talent and make them aware of work life balance issues before they have to work through them.
AT THE CORNER OF WALL AND SESAME is a novel designed to show the next generation that, in spite of conventional wisdom that implies you can have it all if you just work hard enough, there are trade offs that we all have to make. Balancing does not mean failing; it means making well thought out choices.
An excellent anyalysis on this topic by Wharton Professor, Stew Friedman, and architect of the Total Leadership program:
https://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/06/having_it_all_is_not_a_womens.html
It is NOT just a women’s issue. According to the Families and Work Institute, men are experiencing work-life conflict at a greater rate than women. The solution for each of us is individualized. We are all seeking a saner life with greater fulfillment and reduced conflict between our work and non-work roles.
BOTTOM LINE: Business results and our personal lives do not have to be at odds with each other!