쉐도잉 연습: Thinking Beyond Sheryl Sandberg's Lean In, with Jody Greenstone Miller | Big Think - YouTube로 영어 말하기 배우기

Sheryl Sandberg and the cadre of women who are writing about the problems women have that are creating barriers for their success,

⏸ 일시 정지

재생 속도:

110 문장

문장이 너무 짧거나 길면 Edit를 눌러 조정하세요.

Sheryl Sandberg and the cadre of women who are writing about the problems women have that are creating barriers for their success,

whether it's confidence or it's being bossy or it is being perceived as somehow less friendly or desirable if you are successful,

are all fine.

These are not new ideas.

These are ideas that have been around since Matina Horner,

40 years ago, wrote her famous Fear of Success study where she showed

that women were afraid of what success would do to them.

And she did a fantastic research project where she asked women from very elite colleges

and men from elite colleges to answer a prompt.

And the prompt was, Jane finds herself at the top of her medical school class.

And for men it was,

John finds himself at the top of his medical school class.

And the men would write about John's wonderful success and how he would prosper and have a wonderful family and wife.

And the women would write things like,

Jane will be torn limb from limb,

she will be miserable for the rest of her life,

she's never going to be happy.

And based on this, Martina Horner said,

women have an internal block that prevents them from being successful because they're afraid of its impact.

Now, this was 40 years ago.

So what we're hearing today from people like Cheryl is very much the same,

that there are these internal things,

there are societal perceptions, and that those are the real hurdles to women becoming true leaders globally,

and leaders whether it's politics,

whether it's nonprofits or whether it's corporate America.

And I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with that.

And some of these I think are in fact real issues,

but I don't think that's the real problem.

I think the real problem is the way institutions are structured and the paths to leadership today,

which require one kind of person to be successful.

And that kind of person is the kind of person who makes the judgment that working and working

at very intense ways that require sacrifices across many other elements of an individual's life

is the way you will achieve success and they're willing to make that choice.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

The problem is many people,

many of them are women,

but many of them increasingly are millennial men,

don't always want to exercise their talents in a way that it means sacrificing so much of the rest of their life.

And so if we really want to tackle why there aren't more women in leadership

and why maybe you will want different kinds of leaders,

what I call a diversity of leadership that really is about a diversity of values,

not just diversity of gender or race,

you need to create alternative paths to leadership.

And what that really means is what is the problem?

If it's not leaning in,

if it's not confidence, what's stopping women?

I believe it's the fact that most jobs today at the very senior levels require an inordinate amount of time.

It's not a mystery.

It's not rocket science.

It's that jobs today are structured to require people to work 80,

90, 100 hours a week in order to achieve success in the organization.

To me, that is both short-sighted on behalf of organizations,

because I don't think they're are getting the best of people and they're limiting their talent pool,

and obviously individuals who may desire to exercise their talents,

if they're lucky enough to have them,

to rise to the top in a way that they can do it with still allowing for other things in their life.

I think you've got to re-examine how organizations are structured and rethink time.

So when we think about time,

the fact that people are working five days a week,

eight, ten hours a day is actually relatively arbitrary.

It's a holdover from the period of time when we were a farming culture.

And you have to ask yourself, why does that matter?

What matters is the amount of time we need to get a particular piece of work done

and how we are going to apply talent against that.

It's not as though there is a magic to working five days a week or six days a week,

eight hours a day or ten hours a day.

That's just what we're used to.

This is not rocket science.

It's not curing cancer.

It's something that every individual manager and every company has the power to change.

And the reason you want to change it,

you want to think about changing it,

is that you can expand your talent pool.

There are a lot of people on the sidelines who have enormous talent,

but they want to work differently.

They want to work three months a year,

not 12 months a year.

They want to work four days a week,

not five days a week.

They want to work six hours a day,

not 10 hours a day.

There are all kinds of reasons that people have different time commitments that will work for them.

And companies today are not flexible enough to understand how to accommodate

and manage so that you can take advantage of this talent pool.

And if you open your aperture to think about time differently,

then you will find enormous resources available to you that were not available to you right now.

So you absolutely will have greater communication cost,

greater teamwork cost, but you will have such a loyal and productive talent pool inside of your company,

that those costs, I think, are more than offset.

And our experience has been that people who work 25 hours a week are the most efficient,

the most focused.

They know they have time to do whatever else they need to do in their life when they're not working.

So when they work, they really work.

If you hire somebody 40,

50, 60 hours a week,

the rest of their life doesn't go away.

It just gets squeezed in.

And so productivity is impacted.

And I think you find that it affects both satisfaction because people always feel stretched and ultimately productivity.

100

And so I feel from our experience

101

that the folks who are working less than 40 hours a week are as productive

102

and maybe more productive than the people who work more.

103

Again, it's not right or wrong,

104

but it's an ability to have a culture where not everybody has made the decision

105

that I'm gonna put my head down

106

and only focus on my work to the exclusion of other things in my life

107

because I want to excel and I want to be a leader,

108

you will be bringing in people who have made different choices

109

but may have just as much talent and just as much ambition actually and just as much drive,

110

they just want to do it in the smaller chunks.

TRENDING

쉐도잉이란? 영어 실력을 빠르게 키우는 과학적 방법

쉐도잉(Shadowing)은 원래 전문 통역사 훈련을 위해 개발된 언어 학습 기법으로, 다언어 학자인 Dr. Alexander Arguelles에 의해 대중화된 방법입니다. 핵심 원리는 간단하지만 매우 강력합니다: 원어민의 영어를 들으면서 1~2초의 짧은 지연으로 즉시 소리 내어 따라 말하는 것——마치 '그림자(shadow)'처럼 화자를 따라가는 것입니다. 문법 공부나 수동적인 청취와 달리, 쉐도잉은 뇌와 입 근육이 동시에 실시간으로 영어를 처리하고 재현하도록 훈련합니다. 연구에 따르면 이 방법은 발음 정확도, 억양, 리듬, 연음, 청취력, 말하기 유창성을 크게 향상시킵니다. IELTS 스피킹 준비와 자연스러운 영어 소통을 원하는 분들에게 특히 효과적입니다.

☕ 커피 한 잔 사주기

ShadowingEnglish는 여러분의 지원 덕분에 100% 무료로 운영됩니다. 서버 및 AI 유지 비용이 많이 듭니다. 여러분의 커피 한 잔이 큰 힘이 됩니다! ��

PayPal로 기부하기

ShadowingEnglish.com – 영어 쉐도잉 연습

쉐도잉(Shadowing)으로 원어민처럼 영어를 말하세요. YouTube 영상을 한 문장씩 듣고 따라 말하며, 진짜 발음과 유창성을 키우세요. IELTS 학습자들이 선택한 방법.

쉐도잉 연습: Thinking Beyond Sheryl Sandberg's Lean In, with Jody Greenstone Miller | Big Think - YouTube로 영어 말하기 배우기

인기 동영상

왜 이 영상으로 말하기 연습을 해야 할까요?

문맥 속의 문법 및 표현

일반적인 발음 함정

쉐도잉이란? 영어 실력을 빠르게 키우는 과학적 방법

쉐도잉 연습: Thinking Beyond Sheryl Sandberg's Lean In, with Jody Greenstone Miller | Big Think - YouTube로 영어 말하기 배우기

앱 다운로드

왜 이 영상으로 말하기 연습을 해야 할까요?

문맥 속의 문법 및 표현

일반적인 발음 함정

쉐도잉이란? 영어 실력을 빠르게 키우는 과학적 방법