ir tomēr patīkami, kad par degvielas litru maksā mazāk par eiriku. pielēji pilnu bāku un brauc mēnesi, vismaz manā gadījumā, un nemaz nav žēl. šodien vēl arī dabūju kafiju dāvanā, kas arī nav slikti. vispār svētku akcija bija paredzējusi logu šķidrumu dāvanā, bet piektdien, acīmredzot, uzpildīties lēmusi visa pilsēta, un no tā nekas nav palicis pāri. kad bija staķiks, man patika staķiks, kaut arī ne degvielas pēc, garšīgo sviestmaižu un kafijas dēļ. nu jau kādu laiku arī tepat, viršos, var notriekt nejēdzīgu naudu par garšīgām maizēm un kafiju, un diezgan izdevīgi uzpildīt degvielu.

a vot šitie, kā viņus, bāc, nu kā sauca, viada, vot, kā tie vispār turas, es nesaprotu.

izrādās, nav gluži tā, ka vīrieši drošāk piesakās darbam, kaut arī ir mazāk kvalificēti (kas gan nav izslēgts), bet raksta autore aptaujāja tūkstoš cilvēku un secināja, ka mums vienkārši jāsaprot - darba piedāvājums  - tas nav tikai melns un balts pasākums.

women’s reasons for not applying [kādam darbam], have to do with believing that the job qualifications are real requirements, and seeing the hiring process as more by-the-book and true to the on paper guidelines than it really is.

Women take written job qualifications more seriously than men, for several reasons:

1) it’s likely that due to bias in some work environments, women do need to meet more of the qualifications to be hired than do their male counterparts. For instance, a McKinsey report found that men are often hired or promoted based on their potential, women for their experience and track record. If women have watched that occur in their workplaces, it makes perfect sense they’d be less likely to apply for a job for which they didn’t meet the qualifications.

2) girls are strongly socialized to follow the rules and in school are rewarded, again and again, for doing so. In part, girls’ greater success in school (relative to boys) arguably can be attributed to their better rule following. Then in their careers, that rule-following habit has real costs, including when it comes to adhering to the guidelines about “who should apply.”

3) certifications and degrees have historically played a different role for women than for men. The 20th century saw women break into professional life – but only if they had the right training, the right accreditations. These qualifications were our ticket in, our way of proving we could do the job. We weren’t part of an old boys club in which we’d get the benefit of the doubt. That history can, I think, lead women to see the workplace as more orderly and meritocratic than it really is.

As a result we may overestimate the importance of our formal training and qualifications, and underutilize advocacy and networking. When I went into the work world as a young twenty-something, I was constantly surprised by how often, it seemed, the emperor had no clothes. Major decisions were made and resources were allocated based not on good data or thoughtful reflection, but based on who had built the right relationships and had the chutzpah to propose big plans.

Diligent preparation and doing quality work that I’d learned in school were not the only—or even primary—ingredients I needed to become visible and successful within my organization. When it comes to applying for jobs, women need to do the same. Of course, it can’t hurt to believe more in ourselves. But it’s more important that we believe less in what appear to be the rules.