[gregschlom]

Are you American? I was wondering about this too. As a Frenchman, I had the same reaction as you, but I think Americans care a lot about this. I've been told for example that in the US it would be completely impossible for a president to be elected if he didn't had a solid marriage and family.

I find those cultural differences fascinating

[rmrfrmrf]

It's a strange dichotomy in a way; we, as Americans, are supposed to be aggressively family-oriented while, at the same time, relentlessly dedicated to our work. Corporate culture here definitely has a certain intensity to it that can be a little off-putting.

What I will say, though, is that statements like that from a CEO can often give comfort to employees raising families. It can be jarring, for example, to transition from a boss who allows flexible workdays to take your kids to school, drive them to practice, etc. to one who doesn't. For a CEO, there's even the possibility of changing policies on parental leave, etc. that can definitely affect morale.

There's also the aspect of Nadella offering himself as a role-model for those who are wondering if there's life after 30 in the tech world. It can be reassuring to know that you can get married, have children, get older, have a personal life, etc. and still become CEO of a company. IMO it's a good counter-argument to the no-holds-barred hustle culture that is peddled to 20-somethings.

[Sharlin]

Surely, if he strongly identifies as a family man, and having a family is something that has shaped his growth as a human being, it's something he finds worth mentioning, no?

[Uhhrrr]

I don't think Americans really care either. I am American and don't remember that sort of thing from any C-level announcements at any company I've worked with. But my Indian-born coworkers have pretty consistently asked me about family, including how many sons and how many daughters. So maybe it's a mix of that culture and also a show of American openness.

[CmonDev]

"a president to be elected if he didn't had a solid marriage and family" + religious.

[ims]

> I've been told for example that in the US it would be completely impossible for a president to be elected if he didn't had a solid marriage and family.

That may be true now, but there have indeed been unmarried Presidents. Just saying.

[pcurve]

Just 2 bachelors. Happened in 1857 and 1893. And I agree, it would never fly in today's political environment.

[pcurve]

You're right. It applies to regular jobs too. If you want to climb the corporate ladder, you'd better have spouse and kids. Also, based on my experience, having children give you a career boost, even though quality of work and motivation level take a dip. (understandably so in many cases)

These days, it's trendy do the "I am... x3" tagline on your blog. Many of us will write something along the line of, "I'm a father of 3. I'm a technologist. And I'm an avid surfer".

[gaius]

I wonder how long that will go on being true. It was once the case that you had to have served in the military too, even if only as a reservist (Bush II). But Clinton was a draft dodger and Obama prefers to send in the drones. One day America will elect a woman president, then a gay president, then a lesbian president.

[seunosewa]

Homophobic people are less scared of lesbians. They "can understand" why women would want to be with women. So I'd bet that the US will have a lesbian president before a gay male president.

[jmulho]

I bet the US has already had a gay male president.

[gaius]

Hmm, possibly. I just figured lesbian=gay + female and America won't let go of two prejudices in one go, it'll take time.