You Just Don't Understand by Deborah Tannen

I almost hate for my first post in quite some time to be a book review. I've been trying to keep my blogsale at the top of my posts so people could reply to my questions. In the meantime, I've been dying to get on a write. Well, this is how it turned out. I should just be glad that I can cross off one of the four books I have going right now! I never want to have that many books going at once again!

Today I finished You Just Don't Understand: Men and Women in Conversation by Deborah Tannen. I read it in college and had occasion to read it again for my ward's book club, which is meeting tonight. I actually suggested this one, thinking it would be a really good book to discuss in a group of women. It was good, and I think we can have a great discussion, but I didn't love it as much as I did the first time around. I didn't agree with some of Tannen's findings, for example, that men's need to protect women puts them in a one down, subservient position. Throughout the book Tannen tries not to make moral judgments on language, but in this instance I think she failed. For the most part, though, I think she got it right. By means of illustration I'll tell you a little story.

At Jeremy's company, Doba, there are three founders, Jeremy, Brandon and Dave (This sounds like a communication nightmare to me from the start, but that's neither here nor there.) Probably a little over a year ago they realized that their company was poised to become something bigger than they ever thought it would be. So they hired an attorney to draw up all of the documents that larger companies need. Among these documents were explanations of ownership, descriptions of the role of each of the founders and their top employees, profit sharing, etc. The three of them decided jointly that Jeremy, as the more visionary person between the three of them, would be the CEO. At the time I believe that they discussed that this would mean that Jeremy's would be the public face of the company. If there was a class to be taught or a panel to participate on at a convention, all employee company meetings, or interviews with the media to be done, Jeremy would be the one to do it. Recently, Jeremy is getting a lot more attention. He's been interviewed by the local newspaper and local business magazines, he's been nominated for local entreprenuerial awards, he's preparing to teach and speak at eBay Live!, eBay's annual user's conference, he launched his blog, he was interviewed on a more public scale by Entreprenuer magazine, a large magazine with a national circulation, and coauthored a book. Of course, Dave and Brandon are now wondering if they made the right decision in letting Jeremy be the only public face of the company. They're questioning, and rightfuly so, in my opinion, if it's fair for Jeremy to get all of the attention and credit for Doba's success.

Since most, if not all, of you reading this post are women, what is your response to this? If I were in this situation I know my reactions and the reasons for this reaction would be just what Tannen says they would be: my stomach would be in knots, I would not be comfortable being set above my colleagues, especially people who are supposted to be my equals, and I would dread the eventual confrontation that I would expect would arise. This is because women, when they speak are trying to maintain their community identity. They want to be on equal footing with the other women around them, to feel like they can relate to other women just as well as other women can relate to them. When the time came for the confrontation, after I stopped crying and sweating and stewing over it for several days, I would downplay all of the good things happening to me and probably try to come up with some sort of compromise--a way to get my partners out in the open a litte more. In fact, this is what I suggested to Jeremy when he told me what was going on. Does this seem unreasonable to you? Does it seem weak?

Here's what they did. Brandon and Dave voiced their concerns. Jeremy acknowledged them, but in the long run told them that they had made this decision, and that it did not make sense to change the direction now. It would be confusing to the media, to their business partners, etc, to suddenly change directions and throw Dave and Brandon out into the public eye--unless it made sense within the context of the subject being discussed. For example, they decided to have Dave do the presentation at the eBay Live! Developer's Conference, since he's the Chief Technology Officer over technological development, and not Jeremy. Jeremy, during these discussions did not, as far as I'm aware, try to downplay the fact that if the company went public or sold, he would get most of the credit. He additionally pointed out that there would probably be future career opportunities that they wouldn't have because he has been positioned as the expert in their field.

Upon hearing this, I wanted to have a heart attack. I couldn't believe that he would take such a bold position. I would never have said, "Well, too bad" to those kinds of concerns (I'm sure, well at least I hope, that he wasn't that dismissive of their concerns. But then that's the woman in me talking!) and then proceed to further differentiate myself from the group by pointing out ways that the decisions they made would further impact them for the worse. I was nervous for Jeremy when he told me what he and his Vice President of Public Relations were going to say to Brandon and Dave. But you know what, it didn't turn out all that bad. They acknowledged that what Jeremy said is true, and even more miraculously (ok, now that's coming from my feminine perspective) that they saw the sense in what he was saying and they agreed.

Could this conversation have taken place so peacefully with three women? I sincerely doubt it. Men are conditioned from early childhood to accentuate their independence from the community. There is no taboo about appearing more skillful in a sport, better looking, or smarter. In fact, men use these things to try to get a one up position on other men and women. It's completely acceptable, and right within the competitive male world. I have a feeling that such a dispute among women could mean the end of a good partnership. At least the friendship part of the partnership would be over. Jeremy didn't lose anyting--partners or friends. Deborah Tannen's right, I just don't understand. Do you?