How men can 'think like women' to succeed According to Gerzema and co-author Michael D'Antonio, what we're witnessing is a seismic shift in terms of what values drive success, morality and happiness. In an increasingly social, transparent and interdependent world, say the authors, values traditionally considered to be "masculine" - decisiveness, aggression, resilience, pride and analysis, no longer cut the proverbial world-shaking mustard. Now what is required in order to create the kind of future we all want live in, is listening, collaborating, flexibility, sharing the credit - and our feelings. You know, "feminine" traits. The authors spent nearly two years travelling to 13 countries, 26 cities and speaking to 64,000 people. The process resulted in what Gerzema calls a, "global referendum on men." From Peruvian favelas to Stockholm start-ups, more than half of the people consulted were dissatisfied with the conduct of men in their country - reckless risk-taking, inequality - just two of the ills that have resulted from male-brain dominated thinking. In fact, two-thirds of the 64,000 polled felt that the world would be a better place if men thought more like women. So, what precisely does thinking like a female entail? The authors have supplied a list of what you need to be a good at doing or being - in order to assume the mindset of a woman: 1. long-term planning 2. expressive 3. reasonable 4. loyal 5. flexible 6. patient 7. intuitive 8. passionate 9. empathetic 10. selfless But before we uncork the champagne and declare a resounding victory for women the world over, let's press pause for a second. Is it really helpful to apportion values and attributes by gender? Is that not perhaps a little reductive? I know plenty of guys for whom forward-planning involves more than simply carrying a condom around in their wallet and many others who could out-loyal a golden retriever. I also know scores of strong woman whose resilience in the face of setback continues to be an inspiration and a couple of ladies spring instantly to mind for whom "reasonable" would be the last on the list of adjectives I'd use to describe them. Despite the title of the book (Athena was the Greek goddess of wisdom) and the cataloguing of gender specific traits, the authors say that their book is gender neutral: "Men versus women in not a zero-sum game," they write. In a recent interview Gerzema said: "We're saying that "feminine" values don't belong to one gender - they are a form of innovation and competitive advantage inside us all." I'm confused. Are the authors saying passion, empathy, intuition, patience et al as are feminine traits or aren't they? But perhaps more importantly, does it matter? It's all starting to sound a little like semantic hand waving to me. I'm not suggesting that collaboration, selflessness, loyalty etcetera aren't worthy values for us all to strive for irrespective of what gender we happen to have been born. It's just that I'm not certain further entrenching stereotypes by creating a distinction in the first place (even with the disclaimer that "masculine" and "feminine" are just labels), propels us there any faster. Speaking at a TEDxKC conference in October last year, Gerzema said: "Thinking in terms of men versus women not only lessens equality for women it limits our collective future potential." I wholeheartedly agree. But by using a gender hook to spin what is apparently a non-gender specific book, aren't the authors doing just that? Karen Robertson is a freelance journalist. She can be found tweeting here.