Advice for Ellen Pao: "Go become an entrepreneur...Run things."
Now what?
That's the question that is ringing in my head with closing arguments finishing up today for Ellen Pao vs. Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. In the last few weeks, it's clear that Pao's accusations of gender discrimination by her former employer successfully dominated the new cycle. Yet despite the expansive coverage, it remains unclear what lesson industry leaders and spectators alike should walk away with as the trial comes to a close.
I shared this observation with executives in venture capital as well as entrepreneurs at large who have been following the trial closely. Here are four critical takeaways that they shared with me that I think are worth noting.
Performance reviews in Silicon Valley need to be more transparent.
When Deborah Jackson, the founder and CEO of Plum Alley, worked at Goldman Sachs in the early 1980s, she realized performance reviews, compensation and promotions were "frequently based on subjective opinions of competence and your likability and not always on economic metrics." She saw evidence of a similar lack of transparency during the Ellen Pao trial. "The criteria used to evaluate performance is not clear and is open to individual bias," she said. "The lack of diversity of employees, culture and thinking at venture firms manifests itself in many ways, but the end result is that women do not fare well."
Embrace, don't fight, the duality of the testimony.
It can be true that both discrimination occurred with Kleiner Perkins and that Pao wasn't as effective as a leader as she could have been, said LinkedIn Influencer Nilofer Merchant. "Both things can be true at the same time. If that's not a truth bomb, I don't know what is," she added. "We know from this case (and from Lean In) is that there are institutional barriers that perpetuate the status quo. Now, the question is what will we do with all that truth. I hope it dares the industry to change the ratio."
'Do not sit at a VC firm and waste your best years becoming unemployable.'
For LinkedIn Influencer Sramana Mitra, the Pao trial is evidence that if you have aspirations of becoming a general partner at a VC firm, you are better off having outside experience than waiting around to get promoted. "Go become an entrepreneur. Do things. Run things. Build things," she wrote.
'Nobody goes into a punitive damages lawsuit for fun.'
With the trial coming to an end, See Jane Invest Founder Kelly Keenan Trumpbour thinks its crucial to note the risk Pao took taking on the case in the first place. "Pao seems to be making a statement on behalf of other women in the industry who might be unable or unwilling to expose themselves to the bruising effects of a lawsuit," she said. "Pao could have attempted a faster, quieter solution through a settlement and made her complaints privately. But I think part of what has to be motivating her is making this a public discussion."
What do you see as the key takeaway from the Ellen Pao trial? Comment below with your thoughts.
President & CEO at Angara Worldwide Ltd.
9 年The subject of dual standards of performance ratings and promotions was a long time coming. The concern that needs to be addressed is women may NOT be hired for fear that if they aren't good enough, the hue and cry will be if you don't promote them it's because they're women. Performance ratings need to be more transparent and objective, and reviewed by senior management.
Finance and Strategy | Value Creation Leader | Managing Teams, Transactions and Growth
9 年I'd like to see someone give the advice to men in VCs to go work somewhere where they are a minority and see how that feels for a while.
Director of Quality - Amarr
9 年I would like to not ever take advice to Ellen Pao.
Tax Expert
9 年To me Ms. Pao did more damage to women by: 1. Sleeping with the boss, creating rifts and making an unbiased review impossible. 2. Going for a unmerited lawsuit to fund her family misfortune due to her husband losing his job. 3. Making it MORE difficult for women to be hired into VC firms and other firms because who wants to risk opening themselves up to a lawsuit for yet another reason.
Management Professional
9 年I think meritocracy exits in the industry. The problem is that it is subjective, opinion based and lacks due diligence in most cases. This is an excellent sign that it is biased. There are more men than women in such decision making positions and hence it seems biased towards men, but if there were more women in those positions we may not have necessarily a different situation. There needs to be a balance for sure, but there needs to be a proper system as well.