The Secret Thoughts of Successful Women: Why Capable People Suffer from the Impostor Syndrome and How to Thrive in Spite of It (25 page)

But that wasn’t even the part that changed my life. What changed my life was the reason Koppel gave for being so unfazed: “[I figure I can] pick up enough information in a short period of time to be able to bullshit my way with the best of them.” And that, ladies and gentlemen, is a key difference between
most
women and
most
men. When I made this point during a talk at Cornell University, a professor in the audience piped up to concur: “Not only do males consider bullshitting to be a skill, but if you’re really good at it,” he said, “you’re considered a bullshit artist!”

Obviously there are plenty of men (my father among them) who either couldn’t or wouldn’t BS to save their own life. Still, on the whole, males really are more comfortable with this kind of winging it—a difference that
goes a long way in explaining why the fake-it-till-you-make-it strategy comes more naturally to men. It also makes you wonder whether everyone is even on the same page about what it means to be an impostor.

After all, one of the statements researchers use to gauge whether a person identifies with the impostor phenomenon is, I
can give the impression that I’m more competent than I really am
. A high score on this question would ordinarily indicate the shameful impostor feelings talked about here. But what if by answering this question in the affirmative what the person really means is
Sure, I can give the impression that I’m more competent than I really am, and it’s pretty great that I can pull it off!
The reason I ask is because I’ve met more than a few men who see it exactly this way. I’m not referring to the blowhards you met earlier. I’m talking about honorable men who readily and, like Koppel, proudly admit to occasionally faking it but who don’t experience faking as a problem. When viewed in this light, the notion of being an impostor takes on an entirely new meaning.

Neither perspective is right or wrong. That said, you should at least be aware that the distinctively female bias against faking it can hold you back. Because while you’re waiting until you’ve got it all together, dotting every
i
and crossing every
t
, getting more and more credentialed, a lot of your male colleagues are taking full advantage of the healthy benefits of the fake-it-till-you-make-it approach.

People who do make it up as they go along are often considered “bullshitters.” But what exactly does that mean? Answering that question requires you and I to wade knee-deep into a big old pile of, well, bullshit. I’ve met a lot of women who have a strong aversion to the notion of bullshitting. If you do too, then the first thing I’m going to urge you to do is to frame it
in a way you
can
live with. The reason I want you to replace one word or phrase for another is not to obscure what’s happening, it’s to clarify what’s really going on.

Remember, part of the reason Ted Koppel said he “does not consider it a handicap when [he] knows next to nothing” is because he knows he can “pick up enough information to be able to bullshit his way
with the best of them.”
I’ve emphasized these last few words so you understand what he’s really saying. The guy is a distinguished broadcast journalist. Was he talking about lying or deceit or manipulation? No.

Okay, then what are some ways of describing what Koppel meant that you would feel more comfortable with? What about
winging it … holding your own … rolling with the conversation … being in the moment … trusting your instincts … improvising?
What you call it doesn’t matter. What is important is recognizing that there are times in life when you have to be able to fly by the seat of your pants—and that this kind of going with the flow can be very freeing. But unless you’re open to rethinking BSing as it relates to the fake-it-till-you-make-it approach, you may never get to experience that kind of freedom.

To help us understand some of the reasons it’s harder for you and a lot of other women to make it up as you go along, we’re going to turn to someone who has distinguished himself as the leading authority on, what else, bullshit. His name is Harry G. Frankfurt and he’s a professor emeritus of philosophy at Princeton University. A short essay Frankfurt wrote in 1986 called “On Bullshit” went on to become a pint-size book and a surprise bestseller. Frankfurt’s observations about the nature of bullshitting provide a useful jumping-off point for exploring some common female misgivings about faking it in general and BSing in specific.
⁷

Before we begin, I want you to read my lips: You absolutely do not have to become “a bullshit artist” to overcome the impostor syndrome. But you do need to understand any unconscious resistance you have to the
advice to “Fake it till you make it.” That way you can decide for yourself whether you see some advantages to acting as if.

By far the loudest objection I hear from women is that faking it feels dishonest. Obviously, if you think bullshitting is just another word for lying, and authenticity is important to you, then the very idea of faking it is going to be a turn-off. However, Frankfurt invites the reader to consider a line from Eric Ambler’s novel
Dirty Story
, in which a character recalls a lesson he learned as a boy from his father: “Never tell a lie when you can bullshit your way through.”

In other words, unlike the liar, Frankfurt maintains, the bullshitter “is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false.… He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.” Often that purpose is to cover for some sort of error, mishap, or lack of knowledge. Clearly, talking your way out of a serious breach of ethics or the law is objectionable. But some situations really are harmless and the quick thinking it takes to get out of a jam can actually be to humorous effect.

Shortly out of college, Tom worked as a recreational counselor at a YMCA. He was only a few weeks into the job when the director asked him to teach a cross-country ski class. There was just one problem. Tom didn’t know how to cross-country ski. But he did know how to read. So he bought a book on cross-country skiing for beginners and within days was leading his first class. All things considered, Tom did quite well. That is, until they came to the first hill. Tom went first to show how it was done and upon reaching the bottom promptly wiped out. When I asked if he was embarrassed Tom positively beamed. “Not at all! I just
leapt up, turned to my students and said, ‘And
that’s
how you get out of a fall!’ ”

You’d think that after spending decades studying differences in male-female communication, Georgetown professor Deborah Tannen had seen it all. Yet even she was amazed by her attorney’s response to a disconnected conference call caused when he accidently bumped the phone with his elbow. Once the other party was back on the line Tannen just assumed he’d apologize and move on. But that’s not what happened. Instead he said, “Hey, what happened? One minute you were there, the next minute you were gone!”
⁸

As she thought about her attorney’s “knee-jerk impulse not to admit fault if he didn’t have to,” Tannen decided it could be “a very adaptive strategy in many settings.” It’s also an approach women rarely use. As importantly, we tend to judge those who do. In her review of Tannen’s book,
Newsweek
contributor Laura Shapiro’s response was, “Knee-jerk? or just plain jerk?” before voting for the later. You may agree. As tempting as you may be to lay claim to superior ethics, the research as to whether females are more ethical than males is mixed.

Boys grow up learning how to exaggerate. More happened in the backseat of the car with the girl than really did. The fish was “this big.” Other things are larger than life. When you grow up playing sports, you learn that bluffing and exaggerating are part of the game. You learn to fake a pass, to fool the other team by changing up your play, and to use bravado to psych out your opponent and “get inside his head.”

There are no comparable lessons in traditional girls’ games. No one tries to bluff her way through dolls or fake a move in hopscotch. That’s not to say girls don’t argue over whether a player stepped outside the line or went out of turn. But if there is a disagreement over the rules, girls will stop and renegotiate for the sake of the relationship. To girls, rules are flexible and can be adjusted depending on the players or the situation. But
in traditional boys’ games, rules are sacred. Players never change the rules to accommodate a less skilled player, for example.

Cover-ups aside, the reality is that there are times when you need to appear calm and collected even when you’re nervous as heck. To do that really does require that you pass yourself off as something you’re not. In other words, you have to be able to bluff. It may seem like a fine point, but Frankfurt says that bullshitting is actually “closer to bluffing than to telling a lie.” It’s not so much about trying to deceive, he says, as it is an attempt to convey a certain impression of yourself.

You see this kind of impression management all the time in the business world, especially early in one’s career. After all, everyone has to start somewhere, and that includes you. “Even if you haven’t encountered great success yet,” says Donald Trump, “there is no reason you can’t bluff a little and act like you have.” Doing this involves a certain amount of posturing—something that definitely comes more naturally to males. Even in the animal kingdom, survival of the fittest often means that the male of the species has to appear bigger than he really is. “Display behavior,” as it is known, is used to attract females and ward off rival males. Two-legged males also recognize the value of such behavior.

Drawing on his animal instincts, Pierce Brosnan told a reporter, “You’ve got to be a fighting rooster, man. You’ve got to get out there and preen those feathers and look like you know what you’re doing and hope you know what you’re doing and have a good time.”
⁹
That’s not to say Brosnan or anyone who knows how to bluff is insensitive to failure. When he was unexpectedly replaced as the lead in the James Bond movies, he too had to deal with “the punch and the pain of being passed over or rejected.” Nor is he fearless. The idea of singing and dancing in the film
Mamma Mia!
made him “terrified to my core.”

Still, men are more likely not only to exaggerate their abilities but to fabricate them altogether when necessary. Partly it has to do with the
awareness that the door of opportunity can close quickly. That’s why, Brosnan said, “[you] have to be as tough as old boots.” When they ask, “ ‘Do you sing?’ Of course I sing. ‘Do you sky-dive?’ Of course I do. ‘Do you fight?’ Yeah. ‘Are you a lover?’ Are you kidding?” It’s not so much about “faking it,” he said, as it is about being “prepared”—and, once again, trusting in your ability to figure it out as you go along.

As you learned in
chapter 6
, the assumption that you have to know everything before you can consider yourself competent is a big reason why you (and a lot of other people) walk around feeling like a clueless fraud. Nothing could be further from the truth. In a spot-on blog post titled “No One Knows What the F*ck They’re Doing (or ‘The 3 Types of Knowledge’),”
¹⁰
Steve Schwartz breaks down knowledge into three categories (he’s since added a few more, but these are the basics):

The people who you’re certain are so much more confident and able are actually no more knowledgeable or capable than you are, says Schwartz. It’s just that instead of dwelling on the second category, non-impostors have figured out that most knowledge falls into the third category, stuff you don’t know you don’t know. The big difference between you and them, he says, is that “they realize it’s okay to not know everything, but strive to nonetheless.” In other words, they’re comfortable with not knowing. If you know you have the basic ability to figure out what you don’t know, then there’s no reason not to raise your hand. In other words, it’s not lying if you know there’s a better-than-average chance you can ultimately back it up.

What about you? Are there situations where you could benefit from
engaging in a bit of harmless posturing? Assuming you see the value in “acting as if” in these kinds of situations, can you pinpoint what stops you? Is it fear of breaking the rules? Worry that you really don’t have what it takes to back it up? Afraid they’ll find you out?

Obviously, for someone to call your bluff about something you purport to know or do only heightens the precariousness you already feel. But if you really embraced the idea that you are both
capable
of figuring things out as you go along and that with obvious exceptions it really is
okay
to do so, it would change everything.

All you have to do is think of a situation where the ability to fake it till you make it would come in handy. Now imagine what it would be like if you really believed that you don’t have to know everything ahead of time. How would you feel if you enjoyed unlimited faith in your ability to wing it a bit? What would you do differently? If you still can’t imagine it, then run, don’t walk, back to
chapter 6
and reread the Natural Genius and Rugged Individualist portions of the
Competence Rule Book for Mere Mortals
.

While BSing is not, by definition, synonymous with lying, Frankfurt says that the bullshitter
is
trying to get away with something. Here again, men may have an advantage. Even though they respect the rules, males are always looking for new and creative ways to test the rules without getting caught by the official. Breaking the rules without getting caught is considered part of the fun of the game. So if you’re playing a game and the ball is a little bit out, if you think you can get away with it, you can call it in. This tracks with what a male coworker once told me: “Some mistakes really only matter if you get caught,” he said. “It’s like sports. If the official didn’t see you step on the line, then it didn’t happen.”