评论
打印
A few years ago, I had a corporate feminist dream job.
几年前，我有一份任何女权主义者都梦寐以求的工作。
Launching a company's national initiative to recruit more female employees. In the finance sector.
为一家公司推出全球性计划，为金融部门招聘更多的女性员工。
But first, I had to get the signed-off support of all department heads.
但是首先，我必须得到所有部门领导的签字支持。
So I spent months perfecting the proposal, presented it and won the support of almost everyone.
所以我花了数月的时间去完善申请计划书，当众提出，并得到了几乎在场所有人的支持。
But in this team, there were two men we'll call Howard and Tom. Howard just would not get back to me.
但在这些人中，有个叫霍华德的，还有一个叫汤姆的人。霍华德就是迟迟不给我回信。
I emailed him about the proposal, I left him voice mails,
为了这件事，我给他发过电子邮件，给他留了语音信箱，
I'd roll my chair back and forth during meetings, trying to make eye contact with Howard.
在会议期间我甚至前后摇晃我的椅子，就为了能和霍华德有眼神交流。
He'd just take out his phone and start scrolling. And then I started to question myself.
而他只是拿出手机不停上下翻看。然后我便开始质疑我自己。
Had I been diplomatic enough in that email? Too demanding in that voice mail?
难道我在那封邮件里表现得不够圆滑？还是在语音留言时语气太强势苛刻？
Does Howard hate this proposal or am I just overreacting?
是霍华德不喜欢这个建议，还是说只是我想多了？
It's probably just me, I thought.
我一直认为是我自己的问题。
And then one day, I'm walking down the hall and here comes Howard.
然后有一天，我在走廊碰见了霍华德。
He's holding a packet of papers, sees me and lights up.
他手里正拿着一打文件，看见我后便面露喜色。
He says, "Sara, Tom just emailed this to me, you should take a look. It's a proposal for us to recruit more women."
他说，“萨拉，汤姆刚刚给我发了个邮件，我觉得你应该看看。是关于让我们招募更多女性的提案。”
"I think Tom has a really great idea here, and we should all get behind it."
“我觉得汤姆这个点子实在是太妙了，我们就应该这么做。”
Howard proceeds to hand my own proposal back to me. And explains to me the many merits of what I wrote.
随后霍华德把我自己的计划书递给了我，并向我介绍了我自己写的计划书有多么好。
Howard was never against recruiting more women.
霍华德从来没有反对过招募更多女性。
But he needed to hear from a man why it was important to hire more women.
但是他却需要从一个男性那里听到为什么招募更多女生是非常重要的。
And as this scene played out, I said nothing.
关于这件事，我什么都没说。
Because I knew somehow that I was a guest in a place that wasn't meant for me.
因为我多多少少知道了，我只是一个过客，在一个不属于我的地方。
And so instead of questioning my environment, I questioned myself.
所以与其质疑我所处的环境，不如索性问问自己。
I wanted to know how so many talented women who worked long hours and started their careers with confidence
我想知道，有多少吃苦耐劳且才华横溢的女性，充满自信的开始了自己的职业生涯，
all became trained in this kind of self-doubt that makes them say, "It's probably just me."
但最后都开始质疑自己，并总是觉得“可能是我的错吧。”
How was that still possible? Aren't things getting better?
这怎么可能呢？所有的一切不是变得越来越好了么？
Opportunities for women have increased over the last 50 years.
在过去的五十年里，女性获得的机会不断增加。
But over the last decade, progress has stalled.
但在过去的十年里，这种进展突然停滞了。
Experts have previously identified 2059 as the year the wage gap would close.
有专家曾把2059年定义为进入无工资差距的一年。
But in September of this year, these same experts announced that according to the most current data,
但就在今年的九月，这些专家又根据最新的数据宣布，
we'll have to adjust our expectations to the year 2119. One hundred one years from now.
预期时间需要重新调整，变为2119年。距离现在整整一百年。
Looking beyond the wage gap, women are still underrepresented in leadership,
抛开工资差距不谈，在领导阶层的女性代表仍然不多，
receive less access to senior leaders and are leaving the fastest-growing sectors, such as tech,
她们很少有机会成为高层领导，并逐渐退出了那些有前景的部门，比如说科技，
at 45 percent higher rates than men, citing culture as the primary reason.
这一比例比男性高了45%，而其背后的原因主要是文化。
So what have we been doing to address gender inequality? Why isn't it working?
那么，我们是怎么应对性别不平等问题的呢？为什么那些努力都没有起到作用？
Many businesses think they're addressing the problem, because they provide training.
许多公司认为他们正在着手于这个问题，因为他们提供了相关培训。
Eight billion dollars worth of training a year, according to studies from the "Harvard Business Review."
《哈佛商业评论》的研究也表明，这些公司在培训上每年要花费80亿美元。
These same studies also conclude that these trainings don't work and often backfire.
这项研究同时表明了那些所谓的培训并不管用，而且往往会适得其反。
Research tracking the hiring and promotion practices of 830 companies over the course of 30 years found that
在跟踪调查830家公司的招聘和晋升情况后，研究发现，在过去的三十年里，
white men who are asked to go to diversity trainings tend to rebel by hiring and promoting fewer women and fewer minorities.
被要求参加多元化培训的白人男性往往会倾向于反抗，最后选择招聘和晋升更少的女性和更少的少数群体成员。
The other solution has been to ask women to change their own behavior.
另一种解决办法，就是要求女性改变自己的行为。
To lean in. To sit at the table. Negotiate as often as men. Oh, and get more training.
去完善自己，去坐在会议桌旁，像男人那样去谈判。噢对了，还要接受更多的训练。
Women currently earn the majority of college degrees,
目前大多数大学毕业生都是女性，
outperform their peers in key leadership skills and are running businesses that outperform the competition.
她们比同龄人拥有更出色的领导技能，并且她们经营的公司也比竞争对手的更出色。
It doesn't look like education or skills or business acumen are the problem.
这看起来不像是教育、技能或是商业头脑之类的问题。
We're already empowered. Enough to make an impact on the businesses that are ready.
我们已经拥有了很多权力。足以对现有的企业产生深远的影响。
These approaches fail to address the key systemic problem: Unconscious bias.
但这些都无法解决关键性的体制问题：无意识的偏见。
We all have bias, it's OK. It's lodged in our amygdala, it keeps ticking away when we go to work.
我们都会有偏见，这很正常。它存在于我们大脑的杏仁核中，在我们工作时不停地运作。
Bias affects how much I like you, what I believe you're capable of and even how much space I think you take up.
偏见会影响我喜欢你的程度，我相信你能胜任的事情，甚至是我认为你占用了多少的空间。
Thanks in part to the Me Too movement, awareness of gender bias has spread.
得益于Me Too运动，对性别偏见的认知得到了广泛传播。
But the harassment stories that made headlines are just one piece.
但占据头条新闻的骚扰事件仅仅是其中一小部分。
You don't have to harass a woman to limit her career.
你大可不必为了限制一个女人的事业而去骚扰她。
The messages women send me aren't about being harassed.
那些女性给我发的消息并不是关于骚扰的。
They're being tolerated in the workplace. But they're not being valued.
而是她们在工作中被百般“宽容”，但她们的价值却总是被轻视。
I don't know anyone who has ever said,
我不记得有人说过，
"You know what I love about my employer? They just tolerate me so well, I feel so tolerated."
“你知道我最喜欢我老板什么吗？他们简直对我太宽容了，真是让我受宠若惊。”
To break the inertia, we need to take a step beyond Me Too. Beyond just being tolerated as women.
为了打破僵局，我们需要尝试超越Me Too运动，超越因身为女性而被容忍的局面。
Our organization decided to tackle the problem in two ways.
我们的组织决定用两个方法来解决这个问题。
First, if we're all biased, our workplaces need to be actively antibiased by design,
首先，如果我们都有偏见的话，在设计工作场所时就要积极地铲除偏见，
not by trying to change mindsets one training at a time.
而不是通过一次次的训练来改变思维模式。
So our team began by identifying over 100 cultural levers that can be adjusted to counter the impact of bias.
因此，我们的团队首先确定了超过100种文化特性，通过调整它们来抵消偏见的影响。
We found that small tweaks can lead to big changes. And they cost a lot less than eight billion dollars.
我们发现小的调整便能扭转大局，且费用远远低于80亿美金。
So what do these small tweaks look like?
那么是什么样的小调整呢？
If a woman is asked to state her gender before filling out a job application, or performing a skills-related test,
如果一位女性在填写工作申请表前，或者在进行技能相关的测试时，被要求告知自己的性别，
she performs worse than if she were not asked first.
她们往往会比在没被要求提供该信息时表现得更差。
So how can businesses avoid activating this self-stereotyping bias?
那么，企业如何才能避免产生这种自我刻板印象的偏见呢？
Move the gender check box to the end of the application.
那就是将性别勾选框放在申请表的最后。
Example two. In a national survey that we conducted,
第二个例子。在我们进行的一项全国性调查中，
men were 50 percent more likely to state they had received multiple, frequent evaluations over the course of the last year.
超过50%的男性表示，在过去的一年里，他们收到了多次、频繁的评估。
As opposed to one single yearly review. Here's why this matters.
而不是所谓一年一次的评估。现在我们来看看为什么这很重要。
"Fortune" magazine reviewed performance evals across industries.
《财富》杂志曾对各行各业的表现进行过评估。
And found that criticism like this related to personality, but not job-related skills,
结果发现这类批评更多与个人性格有关，但与工作技能无关，
appeared in 71 of the 94 yearly reviews received by women.
在女性收到的94份年度评估中，有71份都可以看得到这类评语。
Of the 83 reviews received by men, personality criticism showed up twice.
而在男性的83份年度评估中，关于个人性格的评估只出现了两次。
But in businesses that conduct much shorter, highly frequent reviews,
但在那些倾向于进行更短、更频繁的评估的企业中，
say, five-minute weekly evaluations focused on specific projects, the personality criticism vanishes.
比如，每周五分钟的评估，更关注于某些具体项目，那些对于个人性格的评估消失不见了。
And the perceived performance gap between men and women is nearly nonexistent.
男女之间能感受到的技能差距也几乎不存在了。
While yearly reviews rely on overall impressions,
虽然年度评估依赖于总体印象，
which are like petri dishes for bias, short, objectively focused evaluations eliminate this feelings-based gray area.
就像偏见的培养皿一般，但短小、客观的评估，却消除了这种只凭感觉做判断的灰色地带。
Now, some businesses are consciously taking these steps to counter the impact of bias,
现在，有些企业正有意地采取这些步骤，去应对偏见带来的影响，
while others just do a good job of advertising.
而其他企业只是借此来做做广告而已。
We wanted to find out who is actually getting it right.
我们想知道到底谁的做法是正确的。
So we put a poll on Facebook, we asked women in workshops how they were choosing employers where they would be valued.
因此，我们在脸书上做了调查，我们询问了一些新晋的职场女性，她们是如何选择最看重她们价值的老板的。
The most common response that we heard? "I Google it."
知道我们得到最多的回答是什么吗？“我上网搜的。”
So we googled it. Specifically, we googled "best employers for women in tech."
所以我们也上网搜了。准确来说，我们搜的是“科技领域中对女性最好的老板。”
Our results showed three completely different lists.
我们的搜索结果显示了三个截然不同的名单。
One business shows up as the top employer on one list, doesn't show up at all on another,
在一份最佳雇主名单上名列前茅的企业，却在其他名单上毫无踪影，
some lists offer no criteria and some are purchased ads. They're paid for.
有些压根就没有评选标准，而有些就是来打广告的。这类名单的搜索排名是买来的。
Employees and employers both want clear benchmarks that go beyond good intentions.
员工和雇主都需要了解超越良好意图之外的明确基准。
The LEED certification gave businesses this clarity around environmental stewardship
领先能源与环境设计（LEED）认证系统就通过明确列举出需要采取的步骤，
by outlining the exact steps they need to take for certification.
为企业提供了关于企业环境管理的基准。
We wanted businesses to have this kind of playbook for gender equity.
我们希望各个公司也能拥有这种类似的关于性别平等的指导手册。
So for our second act, we took what we had learned from testing these cultural levers,
所以我们的下一步，便是利用我们从测试这些文化特征中学到的东西，
we partnered with the University of Washington
与华盛顿大学合作，
and created the first standardized certification for gender equity in US businesses. Thank you.
并创建了关于美国企业性别平等的第一个标准认证。谢谢。
To create this standard, we had to learn what matters and what doesn't.
为了创建这个标准，我们需要知道什么是重要的，什么不是。
We found out that what matters is not the total percentage of female employees.
我们发现重点并不是公司中女员工的总比例。
Or the number of board members that are female. Those are what we call vanity metrics.
或是董事会中女性的比例。我们把这些叫做“虚荣心指标”。
They can be bought, while the culture inside can still be out of balance.
它们用金钱就能买来，但公司内部的文化依旧是不平衡的。
The factors that matter and that should be measured are under the surface.
那些重要并且需要去评估的，是埋藏在表面之下的东西。
For example, even in organizations
比如说，即便是在一家公司中，
where equal percentages of women and men state that they have had access to a mentor,
相同比例的男女员工说他们有过与导师接触的机会，
men's mentors are more likely to be in senior positions.
但男性更可能分配到高职位的导师。
Reviewing our survey results,
回顾我们的调查结果，
men were twice as likely to state they had been offered an opportunity to shadow someone in a senior role.
表示自己有机会跟随高层领导学习的男性数量是女性的两倍。
We're all used to hearing about the wage gap. Hidden opportunity gaps like these are just as influential.
我们常常听人提起工资差异。像这种潜在的机会差异也具有同样的影响。
So when assessing a company's culture, we measure these gaps between men's and women's experiences.
所以当评估一个企业的文化时，我们会去测量男女之间的这种经历上的差距。
And the smaller the gap, the more equity is center of the culture.
差距越小，该公司的文化核心就越平等。
We also searched our findings for the tenets of workplace culture that are most important to men and most important to women.
我们还搜索了对男性和女性来说都最重要的职场文化原则。
We learned that only three factors consistently matter to men, while a dozen matter to women.
我们发现，对男性来说，最重要的只有三个因素，但对于女性最重要的却有十几个。
And they only share one in common.
而二者共同关注的因素只有一个。
Topping the list for women:
女性最重视的是：
Paid family leave, health care for dependents and feeling that their ideas are heard and they're properly credited for them.
带薪产假，家属的医疗保险以及感受到她们的想法被听见，并且因此受到应有的肯定。
These are a few of the 188 indicators that determine whether or not an organization meets our quantitative standard for workplace equality.
这只是衡量一个企业是否达到工作场所性别平等这一基本标准的188个指标中的一小部分。
Based on the data that matter. These are the factors to create a culture of equity that lasts.
这些都是根据相关的重要数据总结出来的。这些才是能创造出持续性平等文化的因素。
Not just for a month or for a quarter but for years.
这些因素不只是持续一个月或一个季度，而是会持续数年之久。
So where does this leave us?
那么这说明什么呢？
Women in the workforce today are constantly told, "You can be anything you want now. It's up to you."
如今，女性在工作场所不断被灌输“你现在就可以变成你喜欢的样子。决定权在你手上。”
Women of color, for whom the wage gap is even larger, have heard it.
那些与男性资薪差距更大的非白人女性也听到过这种话。
The two-thirds of minimum-wage workers who are women have heard it.
在低收入的女性中，三分之二的人都听到过。
Workers who don't identify as male or female and hide their identity at work have heard it.
那些没有表明性别，并隐藏自己身份的工作者也曾听过这类话。
If they can hear, "You can be anything you want now, it's up to you,"
如果她们能够听到，“你可以变成任何你喜欢的样子，决定权在你手上”，
I believe it's time for our businesses to hear it, too.
我相信，也是时候让所有企业都听到这句话了。
Eliminating workplace bias is a tall order. But we can't afford to let half our people go on being ignored.
消除工作场所的偏见是一个艰巨的任务。但我们承担不起让足足一半的人再继续被忽视的后果。
We've given businesses a framework for real change.
我们已经提供了让企业发生切实改变的框架。
Businesses can be anything they want now. It is up to them. Thank you.
现在，企业也能成为任何它们想成为的样子。选择权在它们手上。谢谢大家。
