DM Coaching and Development

What Else to Ask for During Negotiations?

When negotiating a salary package, I would always suggest asking for a higher number than you feel comfortable with. Women routinely undervalue ourselves and it costs us big time. However, sometimes you hit a financial plateau where more money is not an option or there is a rationale around the poor economy that your employer gives. In any case, it is a good idea to have a few other requests to hand so you can design a greater package but also so that your employer has a bit more room for maneouvre if they know they cannot go over a certain financial limit. There are other sweeteners that can help increase your package if actual salary is less negotiable, such as a signing bonus ( especially vital if you are leaving vested benefits like stock in another company), stock in the new company, yearly bonuses, a flexible working arrangement, a dedicated office, private health insurance, gym membership - whatever would make the greatest difference to you. And be sure to get everything in writing - as it is easier for people to wheedle out of agreements if the staff with whom you negotiated your original contract with change jobs or even leave the organisation.      

Stellar CV's - Attention to Detail Counts

I have seen lots of c.v.'s in my time working with professional women and most have a great deal of experience they can feature. However, one of the biggest killers of a good c.v. not lack of experience - it is plain sloppiness. I am amazed how many times I have seen c.v's that look like they haven't had a second pair of eyes on them or include daft contact e-mail addresses like sexylady@hotmail.com I know one I.T. recruiter who bins any c.v. coming in that has ridiculous e-mail addresses. Another piece of advice would be to avoid contact e-mails that may give away the fact that you are returning to the market after a long hiatus - like smithfamily@yahoo.com. If you want your own job, for goodness sake, get your own e-mail address!

A few tips that I use with my own clients are:

1. Use spell check AND a second set of eyes
2. Avoid cutesy/ridiculous e-mail addresses
3. Use present tense for current role/ past for previous roles
4. Use short sentences that begin with an action verb ... "Managed, Decreased, Led, Saved"
5. Quantify achievements... how much money did your project make or save the company?
6. Avoid putting your salary or photo on the c.v.
7. Create individual c.v's tailored to each job application highlighting relevant experience.   

   

It's Not the Economy that's Holding you Back

How are the dismal predictions about the economy affecting you?  Everyone on both sides of the Atlantic is talking about an impending recession and how they are hunkering down in preparation for "tough times ahead". While I am not oblivious to the strains that a freeze on spending may cause, for example, in personal spending and amongst the HR departments that buy my services, I do think that keeping a positive outlook is the best way forward. There can be a tendency to use a shaky economy as a safe rationalisation for not making a career change..."better play it safe and stay in a job I hate". The funny thing is that people often feel as trapped by a booming economy and use excuses then too ... "things are really good at work at the moment and I am due for a big bonus at the end of the year". Successful women see past adversity and look at uncertain economic times as a chance for growth and opportunity. Have you ever used one or both of these arguments to rationalise staying in an environment you hate? 

Is Working from Home the Answer?

BCS' Women's Forum, speaking with gender expert Jan Peters, asked UK-based companies to practise what they preach by allowing its employees, especially women, to work from home. She said that "It is all very well trying to attract women to your company by advertising flexible working, but when it comes down to it, it isn't that easy and they make you feel uncomfortable." Companies, she argues, still have to improve the "inclusiveness" of their work places and empower employees to work flexibly when requested. Ms Peters' comments came after BT had announced that it has kick started a pilot call centre which allows its employees to work from home in Scotland. Broadband has been a godsend for teleworkers and although technology has made great strides in making the transition from working in an office to working from home a seamless experience, it looks as if the human factor is taking more time to adapt. The comments come after research by BCS shows that women account for around a quarter of academic and research staff in the IT and computer science departments of British universities.

Let Go of Other People's Voices

When I am in a session with a client and we are addressing the way they hold themselves back from success, we often meet a "gremlin". A gremlin is that little voice who whispers self-limiting beliefs into your ear as work - trying to keep you in your place. It is tough enough eradicating one gremlin, but sometimes I work with people whose gremlins are made up of the voices of other people - teachers, parents, employers all of whom keep whispering "who does she think she is?"  These inner voices often come from actual comments we hear from others. When I was a teenager living in Australia, one of the worst things you could say about a girl was that "she loves herself" - implying she was stuck-up.  Girls would immediately defend themselves with the vehement denial "No, I don't!" When I look back at that I don't know whether to laugh at the ridiculousness of it all or cry that so many girls got the message that "loving oneself" was one of the worst sins you could commit as a woman! Think of the gremlins those kind of comments can create!

One way to know what is holding us back is if we think about what we want through the eyes of others. If you can only hear the opinions of other people - you will never move forward. People, as much as they love us, often want us to stay exactly where we are - it is easier for them when we don't move house, start to earn more, demand more respect - begin to love ourselves. Our change can be uncomfortable for them - but that is no reason to stay where you are if all you are doing is giving a resting place to a villainous gremlin.   

Successful Women Watch out for the Glass Cliff!

I heard a great phrase the other day that was used to describe a change of leadership that I have seen in a few companies recently. The term "glass cliff" refers to the precarious role many very successful women face if they are appointed to a high profile role at a time of current or impending instability for an organisation. It was used to describe the position of Baroness Susan Greenfield, who has taken over leadership of the Royal Institute at a time when public interest in their events has diminished.

The theory of the glass cliff is that male dominated organisations may choose a woman for a leadership role when they recognise they need a complete shake-up (best case scenario) or when they are looking for a scape goat in the likely eventuality that things fail ( worst case scenario). It's a risky place to be, standing on this "glass cliff" as the woman is publicly scrutinised without a great deal of support and any move she makes is deemed representative of her as a woman. It is also the type of challenge many high achieving women, including Baroness Greenfield, relish. Like so many other things in the workplace, the motive behind the appointment, and what you do with it, is in the eye of the beholder. Have you ever been on a glass cliff? 

Is a Focus on Competition Not Collaboration Driving Women out of the Sciences?

  There are theories abound as to why there are not more women in the sciences. They range from a biological predisposition towards more "caring" fields, career breaks that are "inconvenient" for a publishing record, the isolating nature of some research and the push to have frequent and independent publications. These and other theories are likely to all be true in some part but as the RSC reported in an article in Chemistry World, it may be that fields such as Chemistry are seen as primarily competitive, rather than those which are deemed more collaborative such as Biology. Perhaps then looking at how science can be collaborative rather than "cut-throat" might be one way forward in attracting more women? Post a comment to have your say...

Which is Most Vital? Support for Current or Would-be Female Scientists?

I was lucky enough to see Baroness Susan Greenfield, the neurologist and brain researcher, in a talk she gave recently about why there were so few women in the sciences.  She took questions from the floor and handled them deftly. She was asked about what companies could be doing to retain more women scientists.

She felt adequately supporting returners was key and talked about how impressed she had been whilst working in France to see that the labs had on-site creches so that mothers could see their children in between experiments. That certainly sounds like a great way forward for larger employers who are dedicated to keeping their well trained women for longer.

Additionally, in her opinion, there were four key ways to reach young women considering science. What do you think are the most important?

1. Explode myths about who does and doesn't "do" science. 
2. Have accessible role models with whom young women can identify.
3. Demonstrate the relevance of science to everyday life.
4. Show the career potential and the caring side of science - not all "scientists" work in labs!

Sometimes it feels a bit chicken and egg-ish to me - is it better to put money towards support for returners or towards interventions that encourage young girls towards these fields? And the thought that keeps me up at night, do we really want to encourage young girls to enter these fields if we haven't left them working conditions and career prospects worth aspiring to?

Anatomy of a Decision

I was recently reading an article by Mary Goulet which perfectly summed up why people get so caught up in making big decisions and how to make them from the right place. I run a workshop called "Overcoming Indecision and Getting Unstuck" so thought this was a great summation as it tells you how to know if you are making a decision from either your head, heart or gut.

Getting used to "going with my gut" has been a steep learning curve for me as a former academic trained only to respect so-called "logical thinking" - from the head. However, when I have gone with my gut, there has been temporary pain but never regret.

Where's your latest decision coming from?

1. Head (fear-based): "It speaks in sentences and asks questions beginning with why? what if? how? It has an agenda, gives explanations and makes excuses. It will manipulate, justify and rationalise. It is particularly prominent among those with academic training who think they know better than their gut.
2. Heart (emotion-based): "Don't make decisions from your heart. It will follow your head or your gut, whichever is most dominant".
3. Gut (courage-based): "The gut has no agenda or attachment to an outcome. It is calm and patient and not concerned with your level of comfort. It speaks in statements of five words or less". I would add that if you ignore it, it will start to show up as stronger and stronger symptoms in the gut - literally making you sick with worry.

To answer those who feel "so confused"? You do know what to do, you just don't like the answer your gut gave you. Your gut is telling you what to do, you just need to act on it. Hard truth, but recognisable if we look over our lives. When did you ignore your gut? What happened as a result?

Biased Reference Letters

Joan Steitz, distinguished molecular biologist at Yale, was quote in an article about women in the sciences that I recently found. In the article, she discusses a study of reference letters written for female applicants for academic positions. They were found to be systematically different from those written for men in terms of the absence of basic information, the percentage of negative language, and the groupings of possessive phrases (e.g. “her training”, “her application”; as opposed to “his research”, “his skills”, and “his career”). 

The greatest differences ….. were in the numbers of references to “her personal life” and “his career”.  What is so interesting about this is how frequently the people who write reference letters want to do the right thing for the applicant and are no doubt unaware of the bias they exhibit when they sit down to write something to help a colleague. Have you ever had a reference letter make mention of something you thought inappropriate?