All this talk of 'balance' is hurting women's careers. Let's chuck it.

Whatever you think of Sheryl Sandberg, the Facebook chief operating officer whose new book, Lean In, asks women to embrace ambition, there's no denying what she has already accomplished. She has launched the important question of why more women aren't leading things onto the front page. Women have earned more college degrees than men for decades and make up nearly half the workforce. Yet "the blunt truth is that men still run the world," she writes. "We have ceased making real progress at the top of any industry."

There are complicated reasons for this, but whenever the business world ponders solutions, inevitably, one phrase comes up: work-life balance. This little concept has become shorthand for whatever parents, particularly mothers, are seeking in order to keep climbing. One recent Accenture survey found that work-life balance topped respondents' definition of career success, ahead of money, recognition, autonomy or even making a difference.

Intentions are good, but given the stalled progress that Sandberg laments, here's another thought. Maybe this talk of balance is actually hurting women's careers. Chucking that word could help more women win leadership roles.

Roots of the phrase

The phrase "work-life balance" seems to have invaded the lexicon in the 1980s "when there weren't a lot of flexibility options," says Julie Sweet, Accenture's general counsel. Without modern communications technology, work and life were distinct spheres. Things have become less rigid, but the terminology stuck. Sweet reports that whenever she's speaking, "someone will raise a hand and say, 'You have a big job and two small kids. How do you balance it?'"

Needless to say, few men get that question. But beyond the sexism of the discussion, there are two problems with the word "balance" itself.

First, balance implies that work and life are weighted against each other on opposite sides of a scale. No one says they're unbalanced because they're not working enough, which means that achieving "balance" must mean working less. Holding that out as desirable is problematic for the cause of moving women into leadership roles because women who work full time already work less than men who do: 7.8 hours vs. 8.3 hours per workday, according to the American Time Use Survey. Extra hours, on the margin, can be used to build networks and develop new skills. Over time, that leads to more interesting jobs with more authority, better pay and, ironically, often more flexibility, which is what the pursuit of balance is really about.

That's bad enough, but the second problem is more insidious. If balance requires working less, then you clearly need your boss' permission. A survey by workplace consultant Cali Yost, CEO and founder of the Flex+Strategy Group, and ORC International found that nearly 75% of people believe that flexibility is possible only if their employer and/or boss provide it.

Taking back control

This is an awfully passive way to go through life. Sandberg's book features an old boss' observation that every person who quit because he or she was burned out had unused vacation days. His point? People needed to exert more control over their careers.

"It was our responsibility to draw the line," writes Sandberg. So that's what she did — leaving the office at 5:30 most nights and then catching up after her kids went to bed. She put in the hours; she just did it on her terms. Successful people work how they wish and figure it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. Instead of balance, they boldly pursue what Yost calls a work-life "fit."

"The good news is that it doesn't require big, transformational changes like working from home two days a week, or reducing your hours," says Yost. Instead, you sweat the small stuff. If you, as an accomplished professional, want to bring your kids to school two mornings a week and always leave by 5 on Thursdays for a volunteer gig, you just do it and figure that probably people won't notice, and that if they do, they probably won't fire you if you're getting your work done.

Indeed, Sandberg writes that "framing the issue as 'work-life balance' — as if the two were diametrically opposed — practically ensures work will lose out. Who would ever choose work over life?" But get rid of the word balance, and possibilities open up. You can lean in to a career and make the pieces fit however works for you. You take control. That's what leaders do.

Laura Vanderkam, author of What the Most Successful People Do on the Weekend, is a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors.


Read or Share this story: