Women working at Hewlett-Packard only applied for a promotion when they believed they met 100 percent of the qualifications listed for the job. Men applied when they thought they could meet 60 percent of the job requirements. The recommendation from Sheryl Sandberg in her book, "Lean In", is that, in situations like this, women should back themselves and apply even when they are not 100 percent confident. Although this is makes sense in an imperfect world, should we also be having a conversation about why men are applying for jobs when they're not qualified for them? This over-confidence is worrying and can have fairly negative consequences if ill-qualified men are seeking (and receiving) more promotions. One would hope that the selection process would deal with this. But if it doesn't, maybe it's time to have an honest conversation about the how promotions happen rather than advising everyone to stoop to the poor behaviour of over-confident men.
Women, we aren’t taking action often enough and that’s crucial. We don’t have to be perfect. Men are confident about their ability at 60%, but women don’t feel confident until they’ve checked off each item on the list. Think about the difference between 60% and 100%. I say, “Let’s be confident and act when we’re 70% sure. If we’re shot down, take it like a guy on the football field and shrug it off. None of that 2 weeks worth of negative self-talk anymore.” Which brings up another gender difference. Men generally attribute a failure to external conditions. (That was a hard class!) Women, on the other hand, take it internally. (I knew I wasn’t good enough.)
I'm look forward to giving this a go. The gap between the learning-to-code apps and the actually-coding apps is pretty big at the...
