????今年屬于Facebook首席運營官謝麗爾?桑德伯格。過去的一年中，她的新書《向前一步》（Lean In）在職場中引起了轟動。這本書面向年輕職業女性，一半是回憶，一半是建議，很受讀者歡迎，目前已售出上萬本，在《紐約時報》（New York Times）暢銷書榜單上獨占鰲頭。桑德伯格建議女性不要羞于追求事業成功。她的觀點很有說服力，但似乎和去年夏天另一篇備受矚目的同類文章意見相左。

????雖然遠遠談不上針鋒相對，但安妮-瑪麗?斯勞特的文章《為什么女性依然不能得到一切》（Why Women Still Can't Have It All）對桑德伯格的“向前一步”倡議發出了一些不同的聲音。希拉里?克林頓任美國外交部長時，斯勞特是外交部主任級官員?，F在斯勞特已經離開政府部門，返回普林斯頓大學（Princeton）教書，為的是有更多的時間和兩個十多歲的兒子在一起。在這篇文章中，斯勞特解釋了自己為什么做出這樣的決定，同時談到了那些迫使她放慢事業發展腳步的制度和社會觀念。在《大西洋月刊》（The Atlantic）雜志上刊登四天后，已有100萬人讀了這篇文章。

????兩位聰慧的女性就同一問題表達了大相徑庭、但都有理有據的觀點，這件事本身過于沉悶，所以媒體給它一個更有噱頭的說法，把它稱為“女性之戰”。

????上周四上午，斯勞特出席了《財富》（Fortune）雜志在華盛頓舉辦的最具影響力女性峰會（Most Powerful Women Summit），和《財富》雜志編輯莉?加拉赫在臺上進行了交流（桑德伯格在前一天做了發言）。斯勞特這樣解釋說：“43歲時，我也有可能寫出《向前一步》?！彼f，在人生的那個時刻，自己還沒有遇到無法突破的障礙或者不能用錢解決的問題。但到了53歲，情況就變得不一樣了。

????目前斯勞特在非盈利智囊機構New America Foundation擔任總裁兼首席執行官。她從未想到自己的文章會吸引如此之多的讀者。她這樣定義這篇文章的目標群體：聰明而且志向遠大的女性，但由于個人或經濟原因不得不在邁向領導層的道路上后退一步。斯勞特嚴肅地說：“她們的人生遇到了難題，而她們并不是超人。她們或者資金不足，或者在設法找一份更有彈性的工作時吃了閉門羹?！卑凑铡断蚯耙徊健匪岢龅挠^點，責任要由個人承擔，這讓她們“覺得自己像個失敗者”。

????斯勞特說：“女性的才能遠遠不止這個會場所囊括的范圍。我認為阻礙我們發揮這些才能的最主要原因是工作和社會環境，理想和現實的差距只是其中很小一部分原因?！彼€引用了比爾?蓋茨的話。后者曾說過，人性有兩大根本動力：競爭和關懷別人。斯勞特認為，在社會中，我們重視競爭，不重視對他人的關懷。加拉赫就此問道，你打算怎樣改變制度和政策，從而扭轉這樣的價值觀。斯勞特用她母親在晚餐餐桌上的一個做法為例進行了回答。20世紀60年代，斯勞特的媽媽習慣于在餐桌上擺幾小筒香煙。斯勞特說：“如果今天你在紐約這樣做，就有可能被捕。這是個巨大的價值觀變化。為什么我們對關懷別人和競爭的價值評估不能出現變化呢？”

????網絡設備供應商瞻博（Juniper）執行副總裁格里?埃利奧特此前曾在IBM和微軟（Microsoft）工作，她對斯勞特表示感謝。格里說，由于家庭方面的原因，自己不得不在事業處于巔峰狀態時退后一步。同時，格里認為桑德伯格和斯勞特的觀點都有道理，她說：“我覺得你們倆的唯一區別在于桑德伯格的孩子很小，而你孩子的已經十幾歲了，他們有著天壤之別。”

????斯勞特笑著回答到，她和桑德伯格的觀點并不對立。斯勞特說，從骨子里說自己是個女權主義者。她還解釋說，自己的“人生經歷讓她意識到，有數百萬女性都需要一個更為寬容的環境。她們需要的不僅僅是‘親愛的，只要足夠努力你就能做得到’這句話?！?/p>

????斯勞特想把關于自身觀點的對話拓寬一些，而這只會產生積極作用。她說：“我想（和桑德伯格）進行一次辯論，我們倆的態度都要既誠實又能賦予人們動力?！边@項邀請正在等待桑德伯格的回應，希望后者能很快意識到，向前一步不一定意味著你必須單槍匹馬、獨自上陣。（財富中文網）

????譯者：Charlie?

????It's been Sheryl Sandberg's year. The Facebook (FB) COO took the working world by storm this past year with the publication of her book, Lean In. The part-memoir, part-advice tome for young professional women flew off shelves, selling one million copies and topping the New York Times Bestsellers list. Sandberg pushes for women to not shy away from the pursuit of professional success. Her argument is compelling but seems at odds with another popular dictum on the topic published last summer.

????Anne-Marie Slaughter's "Why Women Still Can't Have It All" adds a different, though far from dissenting, voice to Sandberg's "Lean In" movement. The former State Department director, who worked under Hillary Clinton, left her government job and returned to her teaching job at Princeton in hopes of spending more time with her teenage sons. Slaughter's piece explains that decision and addresses the institutional and social mores that forced her to slow her career. Four days after Slaughter's article was published by The Atlantic, the article gained one million views.

????Having two intelligent women express different, well-reasoned opinions on the same topic was far too boring on its own, so the media declared it a catfight.

????On Thursday morning at Fortune's Most Powerful Women Summit in Washington, D.C., Slaughter sat onstage with Fortune's Leigh Gallagher to clear the air. (Sandberg spoke the day before.) "At 43, I could have written Lean In," Slaughter explained. At that time in her life, she said, she had not encountered a challenge she couldn't power through or solve with money. By 53, she said, things changed.

????Slaughter, who is now the president and CEO of the New America Foundation, never expected her article to appeal to such a large crowd. She described the piece's target: smart, ambitious women who were forced to take a step back from the leadership track due to personal or financial reasons. "Life happened to them, and they weren't superhuman. Or they didn't have enough money, or they got shut out when they tried to have a more flexible workplace," she solemnly said. And the "Lean In" conversation, which puts accountability on the individual, makes these women "feel like failures."

????"I see much less of an ambition gap and much more of a workplace and society that isn't allowing us to use the talent that is multiplied well beyond this room," said Slaughter. She invoked Bill Gates, who once said that there are two fundamental forces in human nature: competition and care for others. In society, Slaughter continued, we value competition and devalue care. Gallagher questioned her point, asking how she intends to alter institutional systems and policy to change such values. Slaughter used her mother's dinner party behavior as an example. In the 1960s, her mother used to put little vases of cigarettes out on the table. "If you did that in New York today, you'd be arrested. That's a huge value change," Slaughter said. "Why can't we have a sea change about the value of caring about each other and the value of competition?"

????Gerri Elliot, an executive vice president at Juniper (JNPR) who previously worked at IBM (IBM) and Microsoft (MSFT), took a moment to thank Slaughter, saying she had to step back from the prime of her career due to a family issue. She then cited her interest in both Sandberg and Slaughter's arguments. "The only difference I see between the two of you is Sheryl has young'uns and you have teenagers and honey, they are completely different."

????Slaughter laughed, then added that she and Sandberg are not on opposite sides. She said she's a feminist to the core, and she reasoned that she "went through a life experience that made me realize that there are millions of women out there who need a bigger tent. They need more than, 'Honey, you can do it if you try hard enough.'"

????Only good can come from Slaughter's attempt to broaden the "having it all" conversation. "I want to have a debate [with Sandberg] where we can be both honest and encouraging at the same time." The invitation's open for Sandberg, who will hopefully soon realize that leaning in doesn't necessarily mean you have to do so alone.