Leading “Like a Woman”
When I went out to raise my first round of institutional capital for my company, Chewse, I prepared in what I thought was the “necessary” way: I cut my hair boy-short, wore Converse sneakers, and generally tried to match the (mostly) male VCs in Silicon Valley. Like many women in tech, I was worried I’d lose credibility if potential investors thought I was “too feminine” — that leading “like a man” was going to make me appear stronger.
Instead, the only thing it made me was inauthentic.
For some women, short hair and Converse is the comfortable Silicon Valley, programmer norm. If that’s you, great! But, for me, I felt out of place and uncomfortable in that persona — I’m a Chinese-American woman who studied business/entrepreneurship and I’m non-technical. I wasn’t being my true self, I was less confident in that uniform, and it showed in the fundraise.
I’m not alone. I’ve heard stories of countless female leaders shying away from their own feminine tendencies in order to be “tough.” As Kim Elesser writes in this Forbes article, “If a female leader behaves consistently with the feminine stereotype and is sweet, kind and nurturing, then their employees often like them, but may not think they’re competent.” So women think they have to match the machismo that male founders exhibit — that if we aren’t “out for blood” we’re going to get trampled by someone who is. (More on this note, below.)
Fighting for Femininity
This tendency to overvalue masculinity isn’t anything new. As a society, we admire and even idolize out-for-blood CEOs. Take Elon Musk. He was voted one of the top 20 CEOs in the US, even after famously suggesting 80-hour work weeks were not only attainable but ideal. Instead of being considered untenable, his work ethic and “relentlessness” is “inspiring” to employees.
The willingness to do anything it takes to win is so embedded in the American Dream that we question when someone doesn’t appear to be committed. But what happens when the idea of commitment is coded to hypermasculine traits like ruthlessness and crazy long work hours? I want to show how I can be committed and feminine, which, for me, means embracing my empathetic side and leaning in to my emotional intelligence.
During my first fundraise — the fated short-hair-and-Converse fundraise — I had an investor I was extremely excited about in the final phases of the investment process. He had spoken to my clients and introduced me to his VC partner. The day he was supposed to come on-site to visit me and the team, he called me and said: “Your clients love you and this industry is massive. But sadly, I can’t invest. This is a competitive market that’s going to require hand-to-hand combat, and you aren’t out for blood.”
I was devastated. I remember just sitting in my room and crying. Then after the tears came the doubts. Should I be out for blood? Would I be a better founder if I was? Was that the path to success, and would I fail if I wasn’t on it?
The thing is — I was committed. I was all in, no holding back, in it to win it. But the investor was right: I wasn’t out for blood. I didn’t want to “kill it,” I wanted to live my life with empathy and compassion, and I believe that the best way to win is to do the same for my company. It’s why Chewse is a “Love and Excellence” company. Did it also mean I was doomed to fail?
Highway to the Genius Zone
In his book The Big Leap, psychologist Gay Hendricks writes about the “zone of genius.” Essentially, he argues that everyone has innate, natural abilities. These skills are where you shine as an employee and as a leader. Hendricks isn’t saying you shouldn’t learn how to do new things and practice areas you’re less talented in, but rather that you should identify and amplify what you are good at when you can.
My personal zone of genius tends towards traditionally more feminine traits like compassion and empathy. After having a depressed slump after being told I wasn’t “out for blood,” I knew I had two options. Either I could lean into my zone of genius, or I could try to hammer down on my weaknesses and force them to become my strengths. The former makes more sense as a business leader and manager, in my opinion, because I think the best way to be a good role model is to be your authentic self. If I had made decisions based on that potential investor’s advice, I would have tried to be something I wasn’t. It would be the emotional equivalent of cutting my hair off.
So many women have done that! In trying to lead like men and be “out for blood,” women are leaning away from skill sets that might be in their zone of genius and instead focusing on stereotypically masculine-coded traits like strength, speed, execution, analytics.
Without embracing and moving forward with our superpowers, we’re constantly putting in a high effort to something that might not have high results.
There’s no “I” in Team
This is where your number one duty as a leader and CEO comes into play — recruiting and managing a stellar team. Instead of trying to do it all yourself (which inevitably means you’ll be innately good at some things and bust your butt to feel okay at others), hire for your weaknesses. So many people will tell you to work on your weaknesses — and I’m not here to say you shouldn’t. But when you hire complementary leaders to your own innate zone of genius, you’re able to reach your leadership team’s maximum potential.
In my case, my COO Aakash Mathur provides a lot of the stereotypically masculine leadership at Chewse. He naturally moves quickly and focuses heavily on execution — which is a perfect complement to my innate vision, culture and empathy-building zone of genius. It just so happens that Aakash is a man, but he could just as easily be a woman who exemplifies these traits, and vice versa. I learn from him every day — when I’m being too empathetic, he’ll nudge me to speed up. And when he’s moving way too fast ahead of the team, I’ll remind him to listen and gather buy-in so we’re all pacing.
Similarly, I’m able to supplement Aakash’s skill set by reminding him that we have to hold true to our values, even if it means executing a little slower in the short-term. Holding each other accountable and serving as each other’s complement means our leadership team is able to move faster and more effectively than if I were expecting myself to be the execution and speed driver in the company.
Finding leaders that complement my zone of genius has also allowed me to be a better leader. As I work with Aakash, I have the opportunity to use innate talents, but I’m still able to extend myself past my comfort zone. In no way do I mean people should remain comfortable and not challenge themselves. You should always step beyond that comfort zone, seek those out-of-the-box experiences. But at the same time, make sure you emphasize your strengths. If you don’t, you’re likely selling yourself short.
It all comes down to authenticity
My zone of genius happens to align with some feminine traits. Many women are probably in the same boat. If we were to suppress that part of ourselves in order to lead like men, we wouldn’t be our authentic selves. And we’d suffer as a result.
I also carry in me some of the more masculine traits of big, lofty visions and analytical thinking. This isn’t completely binary — just a recognition that some of these pieces come more naturally to me than others.
If that’s not your zone of genius, you shouldn’t try to force it. Maybe you’re not a culture driver in your company and your zone of genius aligns more with traditionally masculine features of strength and speed — go get it, girl! Be your authentic self, and you’ll find that you’re an authentic leader as a result.
All of this to say: lead like a woman. Lead like yourself.
