Success vs. Likeability

Women’s Initiative Team 11|2013
Success vs.
Likeability
Combatting Outdated
Gender Stereotypes
In June 2009, when now Supreme Court Justice Sonia
Sotomayor was going through her Senate confirmation hearings,
some critics called her a “bully.” It wasn’t the first time she
had been criticized for her temperament. In fact, one of
her colleagues on the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had
heard the same thing about Sotomayor when they worked
together, so he spent several days analyzing her questions
and general treatment of lawyers before the court.
He ultimately concluded that there was no difference
between her behavior and that of her colleagues. Why was
Sotomayor’s behavior judged so much more harshly than
that of her colleagues? According to her colleague, Judge
Guido Calabresi, “It was sexism in its most obvious form.”
Justice Sotomayor’s experience appears to mirror that of
many women: The same words and actions that are ignored
or even rewarded if they belong to a man are perceived
negatively when owned by a woman.
Or, as the actress Marlo Thomas so eloquently put it, “a man
has to be Joe McCarthy in order to be called ruthless. All a
woman needs to do is put you on hold.”
So what’s an ambitious woman to do? And how can she
pursue her career goals if she has to choose between being
successful and being liked? In this issue of Straightline, we’ll
discuss the bind women find themselves in when climbing
the professional ladder, and how they can help blunt the
negative effects of gender stereotypes.
Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook COO and Lean In author,
speaks often of the success-versus-likeability conundrum
many professional women face. She cites a body of research
showing that as a man becomes more successful, he is
perceived as being more likeable, but as a woman becomes
more successful, she is perceived as being less likeable.
In one now-famous (thanks to Sandberg) example, students
at Columbia Business School were asked to read a case study
about a real-life successful tech entrepreneur named Heidi
Roizen, except in the version half the students read, Heidi’s
name was changed to Howard. The study participants rated
Heidi and Howard as equally competent, but Howard “came
across as a more appealing colleague. Heidi, on the other hand,
was seen as selfish and not ‘the type of person you would want
to hire or work for,’” Sandberg wrote in Lean In.
It’s not hard to see how such a bias could impede a woman’s
upward mobility: As soon as she achieves a certain level of
success, she runs headlong into the perception that she’s
“a queen bee” or “a bully,” and that reputation begins to
work against her at promotion time.
The root of the problem is gender stereotypes. Men
are expected to be in charge, decisive, competitive and
ambitious. Women are expected to be sensitive, caring,
communal and supportive.
As soon as she achieves a certain
level of success, she runs headlong
into the perception that she’s
“a queen bee” or “a bully,” and
that reputation begins to work
against her at promotion time.
When a woman steps out of those preordained roles, she
is judged harshly by both men and women. As a result, some
women—faced with the near certainty that their success will
have a significant personal downside—temper their goals.
They negotiate less forcefully, they promote themselves less,
they advocate for themselves less, they want less.
Even worse, because those women who do decide to shoot
for the stars have to devote so much energy to navigating
their gender expectations—making sure their communication,
dress, appearance, etc., are all just right—they are distracted
from their main job, which is doing a great job.
Welcome to
Straightline
Straightline is a publication from Andrews Kurth
for women, by women. We will give you the
bottom line on women’s issues, be on the front
line for timely, substantive legal topics, and serve
as the hotline for firm news. We’ll introduce
you to fresh faces at Andrews Kurth, provide a
pipeline of topical legal updates, and promise
to infuse some fun features, facts and resources
along the way. So join us for what promises to
be Straight Talk on women’s issues. No lawyerspeak. No double talk. Just the most direct line
between you and our women lawyers.
So how can women own their ambition, take charge and
not be penalized for doing so?
Unfortunately, there’s no magic dust to change the hearts
and minds of those clinging to outdated gender biases, but
there is much men and women can do to help send those
stereotypes to the trash heap.
Don’t be part of the problem
Women are very often other women’s worst critics, and
they can be especially judgmental toward female supervisors
whom they consider to be unsupportive and difficult. If you
find yourself complaining about a woman boss—or women
bosses in general—be conscious of your own potential biases.
If your boss is truly abusive, then you may be well within
your rights to complain. But if she is behaving no worse than
a male boss, then give her the benefit of the doubt. Rather
than pile on when co-workers complain about the office
queen bee, consider whether she would be subject to the
same criticism if she were a man. Better yet, advocate on her
behalf. Sometimes all it takes is one brave person to speak
up to give others permission to do the same. That one small
step can keep others from piling on.
Continued on page 2
©2013. Produced by Andrews Kurth’s Women’s Initiative Team.
andrewskurth.com
Success vs. Likeability
Book Nook
Continued from page 1
PAY IT FORWARD
Do what you can to help other women develop
their talents. By providing a supportive environment,
you help other women achieve more, which can help
create the kind of critical mass women need to finally
dispense with outdated stereotypes. You can do that
informally by being a sounding board for your friends
and co-workers, or you can work to establish formal
mentoring relationships.
Talk up your female colleagues AND bosses
If the idea of tooting your own horn gives you the
willies, try chatting up your female colleagues and bosses
when it’s appropriate. A team-wide email congratulating
her on a job well done, an easy-to-overhear pat on the
back, or a note to your boss spelling out how she impressed
a client can send a big message. When other women shine,
so do you.
Don’t let it distract you
Salt Sugar Fat: How the Food Giants Hooked Us
by Michael Moss
Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead
by Sheryl Sandberg
The Athena Doctrine: How Women (and the Men
Who Think Like Them) Will Rule the Future
by John Gerzema & Michael D'Antonio
Ultimately, you were hired to do a job, not make friends.
True, you can’t completely insulate yourself from judgments
that you “aren’t a team player” or you’re “cold” because you
aren’t as nice as you’re expected to be. That’s not a license
to be abusive, but you should give yourself permission to put
the task at hand before your own likeability. Ultimately, success
can go a long way toward beating back stereotypes.
Give it time
The best news on the gender bias front is that there appears
to be a generational shift in attitudes. The 2003 Heidi/Howard
study that Sandberg cites was replicated this year, but with very
A Sweet Reward
Less Sugar Could
Mean Fewer Wrinkles
If you’re looking for another reason to cut way back
on your sugar consumption, here’s a good one: not eating
sugar can be a powerful weapon in your anti-aging arsenal.
Of course, there are already multiple reasons to cut back
on sugar—it’s been connected to cancer, diabetes, heart
disease, immune suppression and, of course, good old obesity
and tooth decay—but if those serious health drawbacks
haven’t motivated you to step away from the cupcake,
perhaps the prospect of more youthful-looking skin will.
It all comes down to a process called glycation, which
occurs when glucose (the end product of carbohydrate
consumption in our bodies) attaches to collagen and elastin,
the proteins in our skin that keep it glowy and smooth.
When that happens, the result is wrinkles and saggy skin,
not to mention an increased vulnerability to UV light and
environmental toxins (like cigarette smoke).
Of course, glycation is a natural process that occurs all
the time, but excessive sugar intake bombards the system
with glucose and speeds up the process.
In addition to promoting glycation, some experts believe
too much added sugar can actually suppress the body’s
natural production of the human growth hormone. Of
course, our body produces less of that hormone naturally
as we age, but there’s no reason to slow it down any more.
Cutting back on sugar is difficult for many reasons, most
notably because our bodies need the glucose that sugar
provides. But our bodies don’t need it in the form of Bundt
cake or gummy bears. Our body’s preferred glucose delivery
mechanism is through a slow breakdown of nutritious foods.
For most of us, most of the time, slowly digested sugars
are all we need. (Athletes who need quick energy during a
run, ride or game are the obvious exception; their bodies
don’t have time to break down a bowl of brown rice and
broccoli and turn it into sugar their muscles can use.)
But most of us get far more sugar than we need each
day. And chances are we’re not getting it from eating too
much brown rice and broccoli. We’re getting it from added
sugars, whether that’s from our own sugar bowl or compliments of food manufacturers, who add it to everything from
candy and sodas to pasta sauces and breads.
©2013. Produced by Andrews Kurth’s Women’s Initiative Team.
different results. Unlike in 2003, in the 2013 version the woman
entrepreneur was seen as more likeable and a more desirable
boss than her male counterpart. Those findings were similar
to a 2010 study that examined roughly the same issues.
If those studies are valid and gender biases actually are on
their way out, why might that be the case?
According to the authors of The Athena Doctrine: How Women
(And the Men Who Think Like Them) Will Rule the Future, so-called
“female” leadership qualities are starting to become as, if not
more, desired than “male” leadership qualities.
“[T]he skills required to thrive in today’s world—such as
honesty, empathy, communication and collaboration—come
more naturally to women,” write the authors, John Gerzema
and Michael D’Antonio. “In a highly interconnected and
interdependent economy, masculine traits like aggression
and control… are considered less effective than the feminine
values of collaboration and sharing credit.”
How did this change come about? Sandberg believes it
happened because women in the workforce today are more
willing to speak up when they see bias.
“The first wave of women who ascended to leadership
positions were few and far between, and to survive, many
focused more on fitting in than on helping others,” she
writes. “The current wave of female leadership is increasingly
willing to speak up. The more women attain positions of
power, the less pressure there will be to conform, and the
more they will do for other women.”
Clearly, the tide is turning, but if we want to see that change
happen in our lifetimes, we have to do our part.
Most experts recommend
that we limit added sugar
to no more than 10 percent of our total calories
How much added sugar is too much? Most experts
recommend that we limit added sugar to no more than 10
percent of our total calories. For someone eating a 1,600
calorie diet, that’s 160 calories, or about 40 grams of sugar.
That’s less than a single decent candy bar. All day.
The hard part is figuring out how much sugar in a food
is added sugar. Unfortunately, food manufacturers haven’t
made it easy for us to find this information, because they
simply list the amount of sugar in a product. For example,
a 7-oz. carton of plain Greek yogurt contains eight grams
of sugar. But that’s all naturally occurring sugar in the
form of lactose, with no added sugars. A 5.3-oz. container
of blueberry Greek yogurt, however, contains 16 grams
of sugar. It’s easy to determine that much of that sugar is
Though indulging in brownies
and other confections may be
tempting, science tells us that
we’ll feel—and look—better
when we ditch the sugar fix.
added sugar, but because the serving sizes are different, it’s
difficult to calculate exactly how much without breaking
out a calculator.
Monica Reinagel, a nutritionist who hosts the weekly
Nutrition Diva podcast and is the author of Nutrition Diva’s
Secrets for a Healthy Diet, agrees “that’s a lot of detective work
to ask the average lay person to do. But I think, deep down,
we know when foods are high in sugar. And you want to try
to limit the consumption of those foods.”
It’s helpful to know what to look for on the label. The
presence of these ingredients suggests that sugar may be
added rather than naturally occurring: dextrin, evaporated
cane juice, honey, malt, corn sweeteners, turbinado sugar,
white sugar and the now-infamous high fructose corn syrup.
“Although most people acknowledge the need to eat less
sugar, actually turning that thought into action is as much
a behavioral issue as a nutritional one,” Reinagel says. She
recommends using whatever behavior modification method
works for each individual, whether that’s replacing sweets
and other sources of added sugar with another “reward”—
a visit with a co-worker, a cup of herbal tea, or some other
incentive you would find pleasant—or simply going cold turkey
and waiting for the sweet cravings to gradually subside.
“Replacing sugar-sweetened food and beverages with
ones that are artificially sweetened may work for some
people, but it doesn’t work for everybody,” Reinagel says.
“There’s conflicting research on the effects of artificial
sweeteners on appetite and insulin response, so it’s advisable
to be cautious with them,” she adds.
“It’s clear from a practical standpoint that the people
who are consuming the most artificial sweeteners are
not the thinnest,” Reinagel says. “But people who are on
extremely calorie-controlled diets—and they’re extremely
compliant—may find that being able to use artificial sweeteners helps them stay within their calorie restrictions.”
“Artificial sweeteners may give us the sweet without the
calories, but using them does nothing to alleviate our sweet
tooth, which after years of sugar consumption may need to
be recalibrated,” she says.
“There’s something to argue against constantly bathing
our taste buds and stimulating our reward centers with
sweet sensations,” she says. “It creates an environment
where we’re constantly looking for more.”
Kicking the sugar habit isn’t easy, if only because added
sugar often hides in unlikely places, giving our bodies sugar
hits we don’t even know we’re getting. But those hidden
sugar hits have the same effect on our bodies as the ones we
get from brownies.
Though indulging in brownies and other confections may
be tempting, science tells us that we’ll feel—and look—better
when we ditch the sugar fix.
andrewskurth.com
Top of the Line
Start on your holiday shopping now!
Our gift guide has something for everyone on your list.
1
2
Sidelines
Kathleen Wu (Dallas) was featured in Law360’s
Rainmaker series, which highlighted her legal acumen
and civic contributions. Kathleen advised up-andcoming rainmakers to do “bulletproof ” work, think
like a business owner, and view problems strategically
and holistically. Above all else, she reminds young
lawyers to value the client, stating, “I consider working
for my clients to be a privilege, and I won’t take them
for granted.” For more of Kathleen’s Law360
Rainmaker interview, visit law360.com.
On October 25, Robin Russell (Houston) was the
kickoff speaker at the South Texas College of Law’s
20th Annual Ethics Symposium, which this year was on
Bankruptcy Ethics. Her speech was entitled “A Survey
of Sanctions in Bankruptcy Court: The Fifth Circuit
and Beyond.” Robin︐s comments will also be published
in the South Texas Law Review.
3
4
On September 28, Elizabeth Campbell (Houston)
participated in The University of Texas at Austin
School of Law︐s 2013 Diversity Education Weekend.
Elizabeth served on the panel “Mentoring 101/
Smart Networking.”
On September 20, Joanna Kay (London) copresented “Risk Mitigation in Onshore Oil and
Gas Development Projects” to 30 representatives
from the Tullow Oil global in-house legal team
(representatives from the UK, Ghana, Kenya,
South Africa and Uganda) at their annual legal conference. Their presentation focused on risk mitigation
in onshore oil and gas development projects.
6
Nancy Bostic (Houston) has been selected to participate in the 2013-2014 Anti-Defamation League’s
Glass Leadership Institute program.
5
9
For the fourth consecutive year, Lynne M.
Fischman Uniman (New York) was named by
Super Lawyers in the Top 50 Women New York
Lawyers for 2013.
Vera Rechsteiner (Washington, DC) was recognized
as a Leading Lawyer in the areas of Banking & Finance
and Projects in Latin America by Chambers Latin
America 2014.
7
8
Office Expansion
11
12
On October 2, Andrews Kurth announced the opening of Andrews Kurth (Middle East) JLT in Dubai,
United Arab Emirates. This office represents clients
primarily in energy-related matters, including mergers
and acquisitions, joint ventures, and project development,
infrastructure and finance. The new office demonstrates
the firm’s commitment to serve its clients in the energy
business from the Gulf of Mexico, the North Sea,
the Middle East and Asia Pacific, creating an energy
practice that circles the globe and draws upon the firm’s
full resources and strengths.
10
Team WIT
1. Trakdot Luggage Tracking System
$60, trakdot.com
2. BKR Glass Water Bottle + Silicone Sleeve
$28, mybkr.com. Use promo code “andrewskurth”
for 20% off your purchase.
3.Macaroon Trinket Box
$10, biscuit-home.com
4.The New York Times 36 Hours:
150 Weekends in the USA & Canada
$40, anthropologie.com
Indicates woman-owned business
7.1:Face Watch
$40, 1facewatch.com
8.Magic Carpet Yoga Mat
$85, magiccarpetym.com
9.Omega Cast-Metal Juicer
$200, surlatable.com
10.Bag Bolo + Key Ring
$36, aplusrstore.com
5.Home State Personalized Return
Address Stamp
$60, paperpastries.bigcartel.com
11. Theodora & Callum Scarf
$155, theodoraandcallum.com. Sign up for
newsletter to receive $25 off your 1st purchase.
6.For the Cook Gift Basket
$134, orangeandpear.com
12. Everpurse Chargeable Clutch
$249, everpurse.com
andrewskurth.com
Co-CHAIRS:
Bob Jewell, [email protected]
Meredith Mouer, [email protected]
MEMBERS:
Tammy Brennig
Elizabeth Campbell
Marty DeBusk
Deborah Grabein
Amy Hancock
Donna Kim
Kendall Lowery
Thomas Perich
Shemin Proctor
Robin Russell
Michele Schwartz
Lisa Shelton
Laura Trenaman
Kathleen Wu
ADVISORY MEMBERS:
Courtney Culver Stakem
Kelli Dinneen
©2013. Produced by Andrews Kurth’s Women’s Initiative Team.
Structuring Strategic Alliances
by Nancy B. Bostic, Partner, Houston
A
cquisitions focus on a transition from
seller to buyer at closing, whereas a
partnership involves a strategic alliance to jointly acquire, operate and
ultimately sell assets or equity. Ideally,
negotiations lead to a partnership with
mutually agreed provisions for risk allocation, revenue sharing, governance
and a future exit. Some key considerations of the negotiating team are:
New Lateral Lawyers
Jubilee Easo
Partner*, London
Business Transactions
Melanie Willems
Partner*, London
Litigation
Structure
A strategic alliance (“Partnership”) can be created by contract
or by forming an entity. If assets are jointly operated by contract,
the parties may have formed, and thereby become liable for,
the obligations of a general partnership under state law. By
forming an entity such as a limited liability company (“LLC”)
or limited partnership (“LP”) to hold assets, liability exposure
for the LLC’s or LP’s activities may be limited to the LLC’s
or LP’s assets. • LLC or LP—The LLC or LP form affords the owners
pass-through treatment for federal income tax purposes,
and flexibility in limiting fiduciary duties and determining
Ideally, negotiations lead to
a partnership with mutually
agreed provisions for risk
allocation, revenue sharing,
governance and a future exit. revenue sharing, voting rights and control over exits.
•S
eries LLC—The Series LLC is a variation of a traditional
LLC that recently became available in several states. The
Series LLC can create one or more series having its own
assets, liabilities and owners. If the statutory requirements
are met, only the assets of a given series are available to
satisfy liabilities of that series. This structure may avoid
forming many entities, but it is currently uncertain how
a Series LLC would be treated in litigation in a state
without a Series LLC statute.
Capitalizing the Partnership
Assets may be contributed at formation or through cash calls
over time. For example:
• Equity—Equity may be contributed to a newly-formed
LLC if key assets are subject to a purchase option that
would trigger on transfer.
•A
ssets—Conversely, it may be desirable to contribute assets
to a newly-formed LLC if:
• The existing entity has a long operating history or
potentially significant historical liabilities. • The existing entity is an “S” corporation, as “S”
corporations may have only one equity class and, with
few exceptions, may only be owned by individuals.
Allocating risk
Indemnities address the partners’ concerns that contributed
assets may fail to perform as agreed (typically, if representations
and warranties are breached). In addition to cash payments
by the breaching partner, indemnification claims may be
funded as follows:
Straightline
EDITOR IN CHIEF:
Kathleen Wu, [email protected]
EDITORIAL BOARD:
Donna Kim
Shemin Proctor
Laura Trenaman
For more information, please contact
Courtney Culver Stakem at 214.659.4689
or [email protected].
FRESH
FACES
•P
artnership revenue otherwise payable to the breaching
partner can be paid to the non-breaching partner to satisfy
the indemnification claim.
•T
he breaching partner can forfeit equity in the Partnership
with a value equal to the indemnification claim.
Equity Classes
Partners can share revenue equally, but it is more typical
to create two or more equity classes, often including a class
of equity to incentivize personnel. Having many equity
classes affords a platform for sharing ratios for distributions,
maximum capital commitments and cash call amounts on a
class-by-class basis.
Sharing Revenue
Addressing revenue-sharing considerations can avoid disputes,
especially if fewer than all partners will decide the amount
and timing of distributions. For example:
• Tax—Net income of the Partnership will be allocated
among the owners for federal income tax purposes and
taxable to the owners whether or not cash is actually distributed to the partners. As a result, distributions sufficient
to fund the partners’ tax payments are often mandatory. • Preferred Return—Often, at least one equity class is
entitled to receive a preferred return on its investment (in
addition to its other revenue entitlements). Partners typically
negotiate in advance whether tax distributions will be
treated as an advance against the preferred return.
Planning for a future exit
reduces the potential for disputes
and provides clear methods for
liquidating an investment.
Avoiding deadlock
Partners may negotiate veto rights or supermajority voting
for key Partnership decisions, such as approving an annual
budget, cash calls, admitting new partners and contracts,
asset sales or acquisitions over a threshold amount. Disputes
can be avoided by establishing pre-set percentage changes
for successive annual budgets which automatically apply if
the partners fail to agree. Exit Events
Planning for a future exit reduces the potential for disputes
and provides clear methods for liquidating an investment. Examples include:
• Benchmarks—A partner may be entitled to cease funding
cash calls and convert its equity to debt if specified
benchmarks are not met.
• Drag-Along—Typically, partners with a controlling interest
may sell the entity without consent, and the other partners
waive dissenters’ or appraisal rights so long as the sale
agreements have pre-agreed terms, such as liability
limitations. In certain cases, instead of this type of right,
the partners agree to cause the entity to be auctioned
after a period of time. If partners are ultimately unable
to agree on drag-along terms, often a partner is given a
“put” right for a period of time to require the Partnership
to purchase its equity at a pre-agreed price.
• First Refusal and First Offer—If a third party offers to
buy a partner’s equity, the other partners often have a
“first refusal” right to acquire the selling partner’s equity at
the price offered by the third party. Because of the chilling
effect that this has on potential buyers, each partner may
instead have a right of “first offer” to bid on equity that is
for sale. The selling partner then may accept a partner’s
bid or sell to a third party for a price exceeding the bid.
600 Travis Suite 4200 | Houston, Texas 77002 | Tel: 713.220.4200 | Fax: 713.220.4285
Kerry Calvert
Senior Attorney, Dubai
Business Transactions
Wendy Cloonan
Associate, Houston
Public Law
Rebecca Downes
Associate, London
Business Transactions
Joanna Kay
Associate, London
Business Transactions
Julia Houston
Counsel, Austin
Public Law
Adele Lombard
Legal Consultant, Dubai
Business Transactions
Lisbeth Maier
Legal Consultant, Dubai
Business Transactions
Heather Willams
Senior Attorney, Dubai
Business Transactions
* Upon regulatory approval
New Female Fall 2013 Associates
Kristin Bachmann
Houston
Business Transactions
Jill Carvalho
Austin
Public Law (Litigation)
Ashley Kahn
Houston
Litigation
Nikisha “Nikki” Pasrija
Houston
Public Law
Jillian Rae
Houston
Corporate
“Like” us on Facebook:
Andrews Kurth LLP
Follow us on Twitter
@ twitter.com/andrewskurthllp
Find us on LinkedIn
Find us on Google +
©2013. andrewskurth.com