FC NOW: The Fast Company Weblog
April 13, 2006
She Does It. Can We?
A couple of years ago, I wrote a cover story for Fast Company called Balance is Bunk. To summarize, I said that work-life balance was "an unattainable pipe dream, a vain artifice that offers mostly rhetorical solutions to problems of logistics and economics." You can't, I wrote, have everything--even if you work really, really hard.
So, what do we make of Sophie Vandebroek, who's profiled in our April issue? Ten years ago, Vandebroek's husband died suddenly, leaving her alone with three small children and no other relatives in the U.S. She responded not just by sticking to her career, but by taking on a string of increasingly challenging, high-profile roles. Her latest is chief technology officer at Xerox, a job she won in January.
How does she do it? By sticking to strict rules for travel, refusing relocations, and living simply. She hires someone to do laundry and grocery shopping, and doesn't sweat it if things don't go perfectly. "So many things we worry about," she says, "are not important." She keeps the family schedule uncluttered--only one sport or activity per kid per season--and chooses simple weekend activities and vacations, as well. She even keeps her hair short to make the morning routine quicker.
At work, she instructs her assistant not to plan any meetings before 9 am or after 5:30 pm. When traveling, she avoids scheduling meetings before 10 am, so she can fly in and out the same day.
And she always has accepted new jobs, no matter what crisis was unfolding at home. "The more senior jobs you get, the easier it is," she says. "You get less control over how busy you are, but you get more over decisions about when you're busy and how you're going to do things."
Now, I'd argue that Vandebroek is exceptional, in more ways than one. She's clearly brilliant--and her talent affords her the organizational capital to pull off arrangements that many people probably couldn't.
But I'll make two more observations. First, she never assumed that her employer would say no to any of her accomodations. I think too many of us do. We think the boss won't buy in to a more flexible work arrangement, or less travel, or a sabbatical--so we never ask.
And second, Vandebroek has dialed down her life outside work. That's something very sane that seems very difficult to those of us wrapped up in kids' sports, ballet, and piano, plus book groups and community volunteering and expensive vacations and all the rest. There's a lot to be said for discipline, and for self-knowledge.
What do you say? Could you do what she does?
Posted by Keith Hammonds at April 13, 2006 4:58 PM | Category: work-life balance |
16 Comments
ADVERTISEMENT
FC NOW MENU
NEWSLETTERS
FC NOW CATEGORIES
FC READS
This article is bullshit, the key thing here is that she is at an executive level where her income is high enough to allow her to have people shop for her and do her laundry. In other words she has enough money to buy herself time. Also as she mentioned she has control over when she wants to be busy which is not the case for 99% of employees who are not executives and are at the mercy of their employers.
I have only a fraction of the respect for people that climb the coporate ladder vs. people that have success by starting their own companies. What has a coporate ladder climber actually achieved? They simply were the last one left on survivor island. They eliminated their competition of course but in companies the size of Xerox I am sure they have "achieved" nothing more than pushing paper and winning at the game of politics and corporate Bureaucracy.
It is interesting that I found this article this morning (in Australia). As only last night I watches a program on choice, discussing how too much choice dramatically reduces our ability to make decisions. (See url above for link to the store page.)
Sophie has obviously taken steps to reduce the discisions (choices) she needs to take with the result that her like is much more livable while still maintaining her career.
Kudos to the Xerox executive. While I have never learned how to achieve balance, all I know is that it is essential. Perhaps, for those of us normal folks who don't have the ability to "buy more time" like the featured executive, our only option is to simply be content with what we have. I heard someone say once that the biggest disease in America is not Influenza, rather it's "Affluenza". We fill up our lives, like pages in a book without any margins, and then wonder why life is so stressful. I hope and pray that my own pursuit of the American Dream in my small business does not mean that I will sacrifice my American Life. Or my kids. Or my marriage. Or my church. Or my self. What IS the Good Life, anyway?
Keith, I always find what you write presented in a frame of (see!)
I hope people do not read this story about Sophie and her family as a truth that can be adopted across the board.
Here is the good news.
Sophie went through a loss out of which she and her children had to figure out life again without their dad. What grows out of these situations is personal and depends on the mom and the kids.
Life at work, simply is not black and white. Yes, a person can organize life to impact their work family balance and other and there are other factors in volved, e.g. who you work for, their response to the way you work and their response to people who have kids who are single.
In my experience people respond differently from a death of a spouse than they do a divorce.
What is not factored into this article is that anyone who parents, single or married can benefit from life like this and if you have two incomes or executive pay, you can throw some money at solutions most other people cannot.
In the late 1980's, I attend a colloquim at the Heller School of Health and Social Policy with many people who had researched recommendations for universal health insurance and other. The message across the board was if you fit into a corporate system and you can gain from it based on salary and benefits, your family will be fine. If you can't fit, you get derailed.
I have yet to learn how work family balance can work or be achieved for people sandwiched with young children and elder care or people who serve family members (children and adults) who are chronically ill.
Sophie is to be applauded and appears to have a lot going for her, because what is also implied is that the kids are doing well and everyone is healthy -- or it is just left to imagination of the reader to believe this. Just one kid with a learning disability could upset the and stir a pot of chaos.
This story can be quite touching, and to some, possibly inspirational, but too most, may not have much of a positive effect. Many women experience the situation of the spouse somehow leaving them, and the women end up with all the drudge work.
Although it is nice to hear the story of a woman who is able to do these things: have a career and manage the children, home, car, bills, etc., a lot of women aren't fortunate enough to be in a situation where they get enough money to manage these and are allowed some time for themselves. Money is critical; let's face it, and if you don't have it, time is not available because we spend it trying to make money. A woman on an executive level more than likely does not struggle financially, therefore is not a realistic example to use for inspiration.
It is important to have some type of time management skill, however, for any woman, especially with children, and this woman does show this quality. Being a mother is quite time-consuming, and if this woman is able to do all of that, the more power to her. But, it would be more feasible to tell the story of a woman who struggles day-to-day, as most women do, and still manages to make time for herself, while not neglecting any other task. A woman such as this would be completely inspirational to all other women, for she would be "on their level" and would tell of something they can relate to. I suppose using a more fortunate woman provides a goal or a standard for less fortunate women to aim towards, but this type would most likely seem unrealistic to most women.
To conclude, next time an article of this nature is written, try to incorporate an example that women are able to understand and can relate to. Overall, the story is good, though, and I wish the best of luck to this inspiration for it.
I agree that time management and discipline are the key issues. It's also about accepting limitations. It's unfair to say that because Sophie is able to afford to "buy time" that it makes it easy for her. There are still limits to what she can do, and she has to make those choices. I have a lot of respect for her. Besides, we all know people who hire house cleaners etc and still don't spend the time they "buy" with their kids.
I am far from being able to afford hiring helpers, but I still found her story very inspiring.
In answer to Keith's question of if I could do what she does, I would have to say, well, I haven't been able to do it yet, but I'm trying!
I do believe it is possible to maintain a healthy work-life balance, as the example of Sophie demonstrates. However, as Keith points out in his article, one key is the scaling back of many external aspects of one's life and carefully regulating everything else. Prioritization, compartmentalization, and strict adherence to principled rules for structuring office hours works well for me, and is, I believe, possible whether one owns their own business or is actively climbing the corporate ladder.
What is this chip-on-the-shoulder about people who can afford to buy time by hiring out chores? Maybe it's just a wise decision about time allocation. The question of balance still has to be answered whether someone else is doing your laundry or not. Knowing ourselves and our missions well enough to focus on what's important will carry us through the chaos, albeit not always in one piece. Pot shots at others' advantages and disadvantages are a waste of precious time.
I don't know, how much feasible or practical in terms of people's life.
To an extent one can manage the things well, Can balance work-home life by setting the priorities, by knowing the limitations. Even upbringing the kids and managing all work without the help of men is possible. I am specially talking about nation like India (that’s a men dominated country specially in rural part or lower-middle class). Still women do manage the things nicely without cribbing about things specially time.
Here hiring a helper is not so expensive specially for middle or upper middle class through staying happy with all this is a totally different issue.
More than the 'physical' adjustments (such as hiring help and limiting social/work/travel commitments), it is important to make some mental adjustments if any semblance of work-life balance is to be maintained.
The biggest mental adjustment for me is not thinking about work while I'm at home.
For many of us, work has a 'spillover' effect - it continues to engage us mentally above and beyond the physical time spent at the office.
If this is the case, then even if you have someone doing your laundry and grocery shopping, you're not going to feel a sense of balance.
I think it is a cop to criticize Ms. Vandebroek for daring to pay for domestic help. It is a matter of priority more than a raw ability to afford it financially. My spouse and I are relocating to the place of our dreams and we will consider some domestic help. We are definitely not wealthy but we live a modest lifestyle and we set our priorities and stick to them. It is our choice to have time for our family and passions instead of owning lots of expensive material objects or eating out, or whatever else we could spend our money on, and it works for us. Ms. Vandebroek deserves a great deal of credit for living the way she wishes.
Way to go, Dave (#1). He calls em like he sees em. His point, which I endorse is, when the subject is sitting on the top of the superstructure, i.e. - the "boss," she can easily dial down, as she should, call in the hired help, learn back and play with the kiddies. I lost a spouse, had no such luxuries and fought off creditors for two years. Lucky her.
The point, dear reader, is there is NO balance, as the article intones -- YOU HAVE TO MAKE ONE. Leave it up to your employer, any employer, and most will lock you down until the next morning. Force the issue, leave at five. You owe your loyalty to just two entities: You, Inc. and your Rolledex. Trust me on that one. Grab a shovel and dig your fox hole and from there you fight your battles for your work/life battles. Look around you, see your boss in there with you?
.......didn't think so.
Roger Fulton
Yuma, Az
"So many things we worry about are not important," --like climbing the career ladder!
And this one is a zinger, "And she always has accepted new jobs, no matter what crisis was unfolding at home." That sounds neither balanced nor considerate.
I'm sick to death of people telling me that their families "come first" when it seems obvious that for many, career and self comes first. The ability to buy a shiny new SUV every year and to have household help comes first.
I don't feel anything for this woman. I'm far more impressed by the super-smart women out there who work enough to support themselves but refuse to travel, do their own laundry and cheer their kids on in any--and ALL--of the crazy, fun activities that fill the lives of children.
THAT's balance.
I'm likely in the minority here but I take my "work-life balance" cues from a corner grocer friend.
Living above his store, with his wife and son, does not stop him from enjoying his life. If shelves need to be stocked or the books need to done the whole family is involved and understand the "rightness" of it.
The store is their livelihood and a source of pride. An integral part of their life together not a source of resentment for his family.
As for me, I live twelve minutes from my office, my dog sleeps under my desk, my wife is welcome to join any, after business hours, meeting. If my employer doesn't like it, they are welcome to replace my talent if they can.
If this is strange or uncomfortable for people, I suggest they uncouple from the internet, turn off the TV and interact with the organic world as though they are part of it.
If having your own life is not an option at your place of employ then why are you there?
Whether Sophie is inspirational or exceptional or whatever, really isn't the issue. Balance is not a product of a formula or the result of a life lived by rules and practices. It is a mindset.
The most interesting statement in Hammond's brief precis is Sophie's statement, "So many things we worry about are not important."
If I could just stare my life down, feel comfortable in my skin as I face the challenges and privileges of living, then I would feel "balanced." I spend too many days doubting my talent, worrying over incidentals, and trying to measure up to all the benchmarks of successful balanced living that I've swallowed.
Quite actually, my life is fantastic - and sometimes it's almost balanced, too.
And as a mom of four young adult children who still live at home, married 25 years to a wonderful man, and as I work full time as a development officer for a not-for-profit agency and serve on a board of another nonprofit while I serve my community as a city council member and make sure my elderly mom who lives with us has what she needs including quality time with me, and I can still find time to do the photography, reading, talking to friends - all things that I really enjoy, - I'd say I'm doing alright.
BUT - does that sound like a balanced life???
As a woman running my own business and the mother of 2 young children and wife, the one thing I still battle with is saying 'No'.
But I am getting better at it and it's about focusing on what's important to me and my family and learning to identify the 'opportunities' out there which will rob me of my time and energy and won't necessarily add to my life.