Why we need more women leaders

Why we need more women
leaders
Women are much less likely than men to be considered leaders. In 2015,
only 5 percent of the companies in the Standard and Poor’s 500 index had
WHAT IS THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP, AND
WHY DOES IT MATTER?

fantasty or reality?
1 in 4 Americans think it is more likely that humans
will colonize on Mars than that half of Fortune 500
CEOs will be women.

Exhibit 4
Gender diversity of executive management team1
Percent of companies by percent race/ethnicity diversity
1
9
22
38
1613
21– 30%11– 20%1–10%0% 41– 50%31– 40%
01
7
16
31
16
30
> 50%41–50%31–40%21–30%11–20%1–10%0%
00
10
19
7
63
21– 30%11– 20%1–10%0% 41– 50%31– 40%
Population diversity
Percent, 2012
Women
50.9% Men49.1%
Women
50.8% Men49.2%
Women
50.8% 49.2% Men
Average percent
women in
executive team
12%
16%
6%
1 Number of companies = 107 for UK, 186 for US, 67 for Brazil
Women are still underrepresented at the top of corporations globally
SOURCE: US Census Bureau, McKinsey Diversity Database
SOURCE: US Census Bureau, McKinsey Diversity Database
Exhibit 5
Compared with other countries, the UK is doing a better job in racial

What about being your own
boss?

And it is the same in any
field

In the air…
• Only about 450 women
worldwide are airline captains
-- pilots in command who
supervise all the other crew
members on a flight,
according to the International
Society of Women Airline
Pilots.
• In the USA, about 5.12% of
airline or commercial pilots are
women.
• The gender gap varies by
region: it’s even wider in
Mexico (only 2.33% women)
and narrower in France
(7.62%), Sweden (8.20%) or
Finland (12.07%).

Yet leadership is changing
From gender diversity to
leadership variety

A leadership more relational than
hierarchical
• As our economy continues to globalize, as the
world gets “flatter” and as technology continues
to change how we work, leadership is evolving
into a relational rather than a hierarchical activity.
• We’re transitioning from command and control to
facilitative and collaborative leadership that works
across teams, time zones, cultures and
disciplines.
• What we think of as “soft skills” are becoming
critical to leadership– and early career women,
generally speaking, are comfortable and adept
leading with these kinds of skills and abilities.

Simply having female leaders changes
the norms about who can lead and what
qualities are necessary in leadership.
• The evidence shows that female leaders typically
have more compassion and empathy, and a more
open and inclusive negotiation style.
• This is not, of course, necessarily true of all
women -- there are many different leadership
styles.
• That said, modern ideas of transformative
leadership are more in line with qualities women
generally share: empathy, inclusiveness and an
open negotiation style.

Significant benefits in having
women in leadership roles.
• Diversity of thought
• In contrast to leadership teams that are comprised predominantly,if not entirely,of men from very similar demographic and
professional backgrounds,groups that are more mixed will consider a wider range of issues, froma variety of perspectives,
and generate more innovativesolutions.
• Better governance and organisational performance
• Research shows that when women and men work together on boards, much better governance and economic performance
results. This is often referred to as the business case for gender diversity.
• Leveraging human capital
• Women have higher participation and completion rates in tertiary education compared to men, and they are increasingly
out-numbering men in education achievement. To get the very best leaders we need to be selecting candidates fromthe
widest possibletalent pool.
• The lack of women in leadership roles represents a failureto exploit the available talent pool.
• Representation
• Research shows that the interests of women, children and families are more likely to be taken into account by
women. Diversity promotes a better understanding of a diverse market place. International data suggests that women are
responsiblefor 80 percent of household purchasing decisions,and the figurefor New Zealand is likely to be similar.
• The business case for gender diversity
• The evidence-based business case for gender diversity is well documented and widely accepted internationally. Thereis
a concerted global effort to increase the numbers of women in leadership and this is happening in New Zealand too.
• Many large international studies report that companies with a higher proportion of women on their boards perform
significantly better than their competitors in economic terms. Moreover, several studies have reported that companies with
a higher proportion of women on their boards performed better than their competitors during therecent financial crisis.
• A New Zealand study by Goldman Sachs Closing TheGender Gap: Plenty Of Potential EconomicUpsideestimated that
closing the gap between male and female employment rates would boost New Zealand's GDP by 10 percent. The report
identified thelack of women in leadership,and on boards in particular, as an area requiring urgent attention.

DIVERSITY IS THE
NEW DARWINISM
FINDINGS AND ACTIONS:
DIVERSITY IS THE
NEW DARWINISM
FINDINGS AND ACTIONS:

So how do you explain this
leadership gap?

EXECUTIVESUMMARY
KEY FINDINGS
1. Many Boys and Girls Expressed
Bias Against Girls as Leaders in
Powerful Professions:
• When asked who is more effective in specific
professions, almost a quarter of teen girls—23%—
preferred male over female political leaders while
only 8% of girls preferred female political leaders, with
69% reporting no difference in preference.
• Forty-percent of teen boys preferred male over female
political leaders while only 4% preferred female
political leaders with 56% expressing no preference.
A higher percentage of boys preferred male business
leaders (36%) to female leaders (6%). There was no
significant difference between girls’ preference for
male versus female business leaders.
• Both boys and girls preferred females by large
margins in traditionally female professions, e.g.,
as child care directors and arts program directors.
2. Students Were Least Likely to Support
Granting More Power to White Girls as
Council Leaders:
• In response to the scenario intended to detect
implicit biases3
, students were least likely to support
giving more power to the student council when it
was led by white girls and most likely to support
giving more power when it was led by white boys.4
Black and Latino boys and girls appear to face
leadership biases as well based on our scenario.
See footnote and finding #6 below for more
information on racial biases.5
• We also looked at whether students in each school
preferred giving more power to one type of council
over another. In 59% of the schools we surveyed,
students on average expressed more support for a
council headed by white boys than for one headed by
white girls.
3. White Girls Appear to be Biased Against
Other White Girls as Leaders:
The gap between white boys and white girls appears to
be largely explained by the fact that white girls tended
not to support giving power to white girls. White girls
presented with boy-led councils expressed higher average
support for the council than white girls presented with
girl-led councils. Further, when we looked at what types
of councils students tended to support in each school,
we found that in 61% of our schools, white girls’ average
level of support was higher for councils led by white
males than those led by white females. These findings
mirror studies of women in the workplace. A 2013 Gallup
poll found, for example, that 35% of all respondents
would prefer to have a male boss while only 23% of
respondents would prefer to have a female boss, with
41% reporting no preference. The preference for male
bosses was even stronger among female respondents
(Newport & Wilke, 2013).
Leaning Out | Teen Girls and Leadership Biases 3
and self-esteem and projecting that lack of confidence
onto other girls, and girls being viewed as too emotionally
“dramatic.” These findings are consistent with other
research on girls ((Kling, Hyde, Showers, & Buswell, 1999;
Marwick & Boyd, 2014).
6. Awareness of Bias Appears to Matter:
Our data suggest that awareness of gender
discrimination may be related to less implicit,
unconscious bias against girls as leaders. Although white
girls tended to support councils led by white boys over
white girls, white girls who perceive high levels of gender
discrimination at their school show greater preference for
female-led student councils. While our study was mainly
focused on gender bias, our data also suggests that
students of color face racial biases and that awareness of
racial discrimination may be related to less racial bias.7
While much of our data is encouraging (e.g. high
percentages of both males and females express no
preference between male and female political leaders), the
percentage of teens who do express bias against female
political leaders combined with our other data on implicit
and explicit biases is cause for concern.
4%
of boys and 8% of girls preferred
female political leaders.
36%
of boys preferred male business
leaders; 6% preferred female leaders.
6. See methodology section in report for more information on parent
respondent population, which included approximately 1200 parents.
7. Finding is marginally statistically signiﬁcant.

rs in
e in specific
teen girls—23%—
cal leaders while
political leaders, with
eference.
red male over female
eferred female
ing no preference.
rred male business
(6%). There was no
s’ preference for
ders.
males by large
ofessions, e.g.,
rogram directors.
ely to Support
White Girls as
ded to detect
east likely to support
t council when it
likely to support
ed by white boys.4
information on racial biases.5
• We also looked at whether students in each school
preferred giving more power to one type of council
over another. In 59% of the schools we surveyed,
students on average expressed more support for a
council headed by white boys than for one headed by
white girls.
3. White Girls Appear to be Biased Against
Other White Girls as Leaders:
The gap between white boys and white girls appears to
be largely explained by the fact that white girls tended
not to support giving power to white girls. White girls
presented with boy-led councils expressed higher average
support for the council than white girls presented with
girl-led councils. Further, when we looked at what types
of councils students tended to support in each school,
we found that in 61% of our schools, white girls’ average
level of support was higher for councils led by white
males than those led by white females. These findings
mirror studies of women in the workplace. A 2013 Gallup
poll found, for example, that 35% of all respondents
would prefer to have a male boss while only 23% of
respondents would prefer to have a female boss, with
41% reporting no preference. The preference for male
bosses was even stronger among female respondents
(Newport & Wilke, 2013).
he implicit bias scenario
nstead, they were present-
to indicate how likely
wer to that council. About
ented with each council
ed to give more power to a
they wanted to give more
We then compared the
ncil.
in the percent of students
5. Some of our reported findings are specific to white girls and boys,
because that is where we saw the most statistically significant findings.
However, responses to our implicit bias scenario suggest that students
and parents do not view students’ capacity for leadership through one
simple gender or race lens. It was hard for us to clearly assess students’
views about race because most differences in students’ responses to
student council leaders on the implicit bias scenario were not statisti-
cally significant. Yet it does appear from our data that students have
complex views about how race and gender mix. For example, students
expressed roughly the same amount of support for Latina councils as
for white male councils. These findings—and how students generally
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y
4. Some Mothers Appear to be Biased
Against Girls as Leaders
On average, mothers presented with councils led by boys
expressed stronger support than mothers presented
with councils led by girls. We were not able to determine
whether fathers had biases against girls because our
sample of fathers was too small.6
5. Biases Against Girls have Many Causes:
Our focus groups and interviews suggested a variety
of reasons for students’ biases against girls and for
white girls’ biases against each other, including highly
competitive feelings among girls, girls lacking confidence
4%
36%
of boys preferred male business
leaders; 6% preferred female leaders.
40%
of teen boys and 23% of teen
girls preferred male over female
political leaders.

12 MAKING CARING COMMON | A Project of the Harvard Graduate School of Education
cited here, suggests males’ biases female leaders.
GENDER BIASES HAVE MANY CAUSES
of reasons for students’ biases toward white girls and
for girls’ biases against each other. A few students, for
example, indicated that because many girls have low
self-esteem, they may assume that other girls have little
self-esteem and thus wouldn’t be good leaders. As one
student put it: “Girls wouldn’t vote for themselves, so
why would they vote for another girl?”
Other students mentioned highly competitive feelings
among girls. As one student stated flat-out, “I’m
determined to beat other girls.” Some students
suggested that many girls are viewed as too “dramatic”
to be good leaders. Finally, a smaller number of
students shared other reasons for girls not picking
other girls: “girls don’t trust each other” or girls “aren’t
nice.” These findings are consistent with other research,
including research indicating that girls caught up in
social hierarchies undercut each other in struggles for
leadership and research documenting girls’ competitive
feelings and tendency for “drama” (Brown, 2003;
Teen girls’ explicit and implicit, unconscious biases
toward other girls are likely the result of many
additional factors interacting differently for girls at
While these biases have many complex roots, the
good news is that our findings suggest that awareness
of gender bias and discrimination is linked to less
reported bias. One hopes that as people become
aware of biases, they are better able to bring them
under conscious control and counteract them. That
may be true of white girls in our study in terms of
leadership biases. We asked students whether
students at their school were discriminated against
or excluded based on their gender. White girls who
perceived no gender discrimination at their school
were, on average, biases against girl-led councils,
unlike white girls who perceived high levels of
discrimination. The more discrimination white girls
perceived, the lower their bias.13
“Girls wouldn’t vote for
themselves, so why would
they vote for another girl?”
13. Our data did not indicate that boys’ awareness of gender discrimina-
tion was associated with less gender bias. But that may be because boys
interpreted gender discrimination diﬀerently than girls. It’s possible that
many boys who reported awareness of gender discrimination at their
school thought that “gender discrimination” referred to discrimination
not against girls but against boys. It seems far less likely that girls inter-
preted “gender discrimination” as discrimination against boys.

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y
4. Some Mothers Appear to be Biased
Against Girls as Leaders
On average, mothers presented with councils led by boys
expressed stronger support than mothers presented
with councils led by girls. We were not able to determine
whether fathers had biases against girls because our
sample of fathers was too small.6
4%
40%
of teen boys and 23% of teen
girls preferred male over female
political leaders.
Leaning Out | T
4%
of boys and
female poli
36%
of boys pre
leaders; 6%
6. See methodology section in report for more information on parent
respondent population, which included approximately 1200 parents.
7. Finding is marginally statistically signiﬁcant.

REPORT
leadership positions, especially in high-power fields.
EXPLICIT BIAS: POWERFUL BOYS AND
NURTURING GIRLS
Many teen girls have explicit biases toward other girls
when it comes to powerful, high status professions.
Explicit and implicit biases are very different beasts.
Implicit biases are unconscious and typically automatic
and people are generally motivated to eradicate them.
A teen girl who wholeheartedly believes that women
are just as capable business leaders as men will be
distressed to discover that she holds an implicit bias
against women business leaders and will be motivated
to learn how to handle this bias. Explicit biases, on the
other hand, reflect what people overtly believe to be true.
Some teen girls and boys, for example, simply believe
that males are better political leaders than females.10
Many girls in our survey expressed explicit biases toward
females as political leaders. Girls didn’t express explicit
biases toward other girls when it comes to leadership in
general. When asked directly on our survey whether boys
or girls are better leaders, girls are, in fact, more likely to
report that girls are better leaders. Girls are also just as
likely as boys to report that they anticipate that they will
“be effective leaders as adults.” Girls reported, too, that
they are just as smart as boys and can handle pressure
as well as boys.
Yet when asked explicitly who they prefer as political
leaders, 23% of girls preferred males while only 8% of
girls preferred females, with 69% of girls reporting no
preference. Girls expressed no significant preference for
males or females as business leaders.
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Girls’ Answers Boys’ Answers
Males
Females
Males
Females
WHO MAKES BETTER CHILDCARE LEADERS
Neither
Females
FemalesFemales50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Males
Neither
Males
Neither
Girls were more likely to view females as better leaders
than males in traditionally female professions, such
as child care directors, health care directors and art
directors. Fully 49% of girls saw girls as more capable
child care directors while only three girls (which rounds to
0%) reported that males were better child care directors.
Boys were more likely to report both that males were
better leaders overall and in powerful professions. Forty
percent of boys preferred male to female political leaders
and only 4% preferred female political leaders with 56%
expressing no preference. That a significantly higher
percentage of both boys and girls prefer male political
leaders can clearly matter a great deal in political
elections at every level, which are often won by small
margins.
10. This data is based on 2 of our surveys combined (about
2,600 students).
ARE TEEN GIRLS LEANING OUT?
Our results suggest that teen girls both hold biases and
suffer from biases that may corrode their relationships
and sense of justice, sap their confidence in their
leadership potential, and dampen their desire to seek
leadership positions, especially in high-power fields.
EXPLICIT BIAS: POWERFUL BOYS AND
NURTURING GIRLS
Many teen girls have explicit biases toward other girls
when it comes to powerful, high status professions.
Explicit and implicit biases are very different beasts.
Implicit biases are unconscious and typically automatic
and people are generally motivated to eradicate them.
A teen girl who wholeheartedly believes that women
are just as capable business leaders as men will be
distressed to discover that she holds an implicit bias
against women business leaders and will be motivated
to learn how to handle this bias. Explicit biases, on the
other hand, reflect what people overtly believe to be true.
Some teen girls and boys, for example, simply believe
that males are better political leaders than females.10
Many girls in our survey expressed explicit biases toward
females as political leaders. Girls didn’t express explicit
biases toward other girls when it comes to leadership in
general. When asked directly on our survey whether boys
or girls are better leaders, girls are, in fact, more likely to
report that girls are better leaders. Girls are also just as
likely as boys to report that they anticipate that they will
“be effective leaders as adults.” Girls reported, too, that
they are just as smart as boys and can handle pressure
WHO MAKES BETTER POLITICAL LEADERS
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Neither
Males
Females
Neither
Males
Females
WHO MAKES BETTER CHILDCARE LEADERS
Neither
Females
FemalesFemales50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Males
Neither
Males
Neither
Girls were more likely to view females as better leaders
than males in traditionally female professions, such
as child care directors, health care directors and art
directors. Fully 49% of girls saw girls as more capable
child care directors while only three girls (which rounds to
0%) reported that males were better child care directors.

People become leaders by internalizing a
leadership identity and developing a
sense of purpose.
• An absence of affirmation, however, diminishes
self-confidence and discourages him or her from
seeking developmental opportunities or
experimenting.
• Leadership identity, which begins as a tentative,
peripheral aspect of the self, eventually withers
away, along with opportunities to grow through
new assignments and real achievements.
• Over time, an aspiring leader acquires a
reputation as having—or not having—high
potential.

• Stereotypically male
characteristics—
independence,
aggression,
competitiveness,
rationality, dominance,
objectivity— all correlate
with current expectations
of leadership (Crites et al.,
2015).

What Is Second-Generation
Gender Bias?
• Women are not deliberately excluded from leadership.
• But subtle and often invisible barriers for women that arise from
cultural assumptions and organizational structures, practices, and
patterns of interaction that inadvertently benefit men while putting
women at a disadvantage.
• Among them are:
• A paucity of role models for women.
• Gendered career paths and gendered work.
– entrenched organizational structures and work practices designed to fit
men’s lives (rotationto sales or operations, international outpost)
– undervalue behind-the-scenes work (building a team, avoiding a crisis),
which women are more likely to do, while rewarding heroic work, which is
most often done by men.

What Is Second-Generation
Gender Bias?
• Women’s lack of access to networks and sponsors.
– lack of access to influential colleagues. men in positions of power tend to
direct developmental opportunities to junior men.
• Double binds.
– In most cultures masculinity and leadership are closely linked: The ideal
leader, like the ideal man, is decisive, assertive, and independent.
– In contrast, women are expected to be nice, caretaking, and unselfish.
The mismatch between conventionally feminine qualities and the qualities
thought necessary for leadership puts female leaders in a double bind.
– Numerous studies have shown that women who excel in traditionally male
domains are viewed as competent but less likable than their male
counterparts. Behaviors that suggest self-confidence or assertiveness in
men often appear arrogant or abrasive in women.
– Meanwhile, women in positions of authority who enact a conventionally
feminine style may be liked but are not respected. They are deemed too
emotional to make tough decisions and too soft to be strong leaders.

a group of people to follow. Leadership can be used wisely or foolishly; it is
not inherently good.
This report focuses on “positional leaders,” that is, people who occupy
positions of power that are recognized and rewarded in observable ways.
This focus, however, does not suggest that other forms of leadership are less
important, simply that they are more difficult to measure.
LEADERSHIP AND MASCULINITY
Despite stereotypes about macho leaders, leadership is not inherently mas-
culine. Because white men have held most leadership positions in society
for so long, the concept of leadership has been infused with stereotypically
masculine traits: aggression, decisiveness, willingness to engage in conflict,
strength, and so on. These traits are not uniquely available to white men,
of course, nor are they predominant personality traits in all men. Indeed,
researchers have explored the essential ingredients of leadership and found
no gender differences in leadership effectiveness (Hyde, 2014).
The question of whether women and men have different approaches to
leadership has been the subject of numerous studies and books. Women can
and do use typically male leadership styles. For example, medical emergen-
cies call for quick, coordinated action that requires decisive, authoritative
leadership. A recent study of medical residents found that both men and
women use this form of leadership effectively—although women are more
likely to apologize to their colleagues for abrupt behavior after the event
(Kolehmainen et al., 2014). Researchers have also found that women tend to
adopt a transformational leadership style, which motivates followers through

women of color confront race and ethnic discrimination that white women
do not face, they also experience gender bias differently than white women
do—and they experience racial bias differently than do the men in their
racial or ethnic group (J. Williams et al., 2014). Scholars use the term “inter-
sectionality” to describe this phenomenon.
WOMEN LEADERS ACROSS TIME
Women have been leaders throughout history. From the pharaohs of Egypt
to the queens of England, women rulers are found in nearly every culture
and time period. Yet, in almost all circumstances, male leaders greatly out-
number female leaders. Moreover, customs and laws against female leader-
ship can be found throughout history, most notably in every major religion
(Christ, 2014).
Women have served as leaders in social movements; for example, prominent
women such as Sojourner Truth and Harriet Tubman campaigned fear-
lessly for the liberation of African Americans (Ngunjiri et al., 2012). In the
early 1900s, Native American women led their own women’s clubs to learn
subjects that they had been denied access to because of their gender and
ethnicity (Tetzloff, 2007). More recently, women have led efforts to improve
sanitation and health care, develop public education, establish public librar-
ies, and create a social welfare system. They have led social change in such

15AAUW
WHAT EXPLAINS
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?
s there still a dearth of women leaders in the United States? Are there
ough qualified candidates? Is there still discrimination against women
s? Are women simply choosing to prioritize family over career?
uestion can be posed another, equally important way: Why are men
presented in leadership roles? Are they not qualified for or interested
er kinds of work? Is there still discrimination against men who are not
s? Are men simply choosing to prioritize career over family?
nal choices are never made in a vacuum. Organizational, cultural,
mic, and policy barriers shape both men’s and women’s choices and
tunities. Women’s underrepresentation in leadership has been framed
eficit in which something is holding women back from becoming
s. Initially described as a glass ceiling—the symbolic wall women hit
-management levels—barriers to women’s advancement can also be
ht of as a labyrinth. Alice Eagly and Linda Carli (2007) proposed this
pt to describe how, all along the way, women confront distinct barriers
ymie or derail their progress.
dless of metaphor, one thing is clear: Women are not simply denied
adership opportunities at the culmination of a long career. Rather,
16 Barriers and Bias
resembling the careers of men.
PERSISTENT SEX DISCRIMINATION
Some bias against women is subtle, but overt—and illegal—discrimin
against women in the workplace remains an issue. Companies somet
still unguardedly state a gender preference for some positions—such
Hostile work environments are a form of
discrimination that can shape careers.
Women leaders are still perceived as masculine
and are sometimes negatively stereotyped as
“lesbians.”
“Microaggressions” to describe small mean-
spirited acts, such as exclusion and low-level
verbal harassment.
Many women’s experiences in business,
education, and politics are profoundly affected
by sexual harassment.

the status quo is holding women back from leadership roles, it is holding
men back from embracing caretaking and support roles.
LACK OF EFFECTIVE NETWORKS AND MENTORS
Access to influential networks is critical to moving up the leadership hierar-
chy. Some studies have found that the social capital gained from networking
with influential leaders is even more important for advancement than job
performance (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Hewlett et al., 2010). Research suggests
that, although women and men are equally likely to have mentors, women
may benefit less than men from this arrangement, especially in the areas of
salary and promotions. More recently, scholars have focused on sponsor-
ship, a form of mentorship in which sponsors share both status and oppor-
tunity. For example, sponsors can co-author articles, provide key contacts,
share important meeting opportunities, and actively seek out future career
opportunities. This influential and specific professional relationship has been
shown to be more effective than traditional mentorship (Catalyst, 2011).
Women of color aspiring to leadership positions face unique challenges in
finding a sponsor. Compared with white men, women and men of color
have limited access to social networks that can provide information about
jobs, promotions, professional advice, resources, and expertise. In addition,
the lives of women of color outside of work are less likely to overlap with
those of influential managers, who tend to be white. White women are more
likely to live in the same neighborhoods, send their children to the same
schools, and participate in the same community organizations as the power-
ful men in their workplace. For women of color, networking requires more
effort.
Women are generally considered to have strong communication skills, so it
Access to influential networks is critical to moving up the
leadership hierarchy. Some studies have found that the
social capital gained from networking with influential
leaders is even more important for advancement than
job performance (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Hewlett et al.,
2010).
More recently, scholars have focused on sponsorship, a
form of mentorship in which sponsors share both status
and opportunity.
15AAUW
WHAT EXPLAINS
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?

The women reported a lack of understanding
and support from family and colleagues, as well
as different expectations for themselves and
their male peers.
whereas the “president’s wife” is (Oguntoyinbo, 2014).
CAREGIVING AND WOMEN’S “CHOICES”
Balancing work and family responsibilities is one of the most challenging
obstacles for women seeking leadership positions (Eagly & Carli, 2007;
Sandberg, 2013), and it can be especially daunting for the millions of work-
ing women raising children on their own (Hess & Kelly, 2015). Women are
usually the primary (if not the only) parent caring for children and other
family members during their peak years in the workforce. They are more
likely than men to work irregularly and spend time out of the workforce
(Rose & Hartmann, 2008), and they are more likely to work part time (U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016). They also take more time off for fam-
ily commitments than men do (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2015c).
Moreover, women (and men) may feel deeply conflicted about leaving theirBalancing work and family responsibilities is one of the
most challenging obstacles for women seeking leadership
positions (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Sandberg, 2013), and it
can be especially daunting for the millions of working
women raising children on their own (Hess & Kelly,
2015). Women are usually the primary (if not the only)
parent caring for children and other family members
during their peak years in the workforce.
Differences in women’s and men’s earnings also
contribute to the leadership gap.
15AAUW
WHAT EXPLAINS
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?

The gender imbalance in leadership is both a women’s issue and a men’s
issue. Being a leader is not inherently valuable or desirable. Leadership
roles can be time consuming and often require great responsibility, which
can cause a great deal of stress and leave littleroom for other priorities.
Just as the status quo is holding women back from leadership roles, it is
holding men back from embracing caretaking and support roles.
15AAUW
WHAT EXPLAINS
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?

Stereotypes and bias affect how we see
ourselves, as well as how we see others.
• For example, there is a self-confidence gap between women and
men (Schuh et al., 2014).
• Whereas men are socialized to be confident, assertive, and self-
promoting, cultural attitudes toward women as leaders continue to
suggest to women that it is often inappropriate or undesirable to
possess those characteristics (Enloe, 2004; Flammang, 1997).
• Women’s tendency to diminish and undervalue their professional
skills and achievements is in place by adolescence.
• At the same time, male students overestimate their skills and
female students underestimate theirs relative to objective indicators
of competence (Pajares & Schunk, 2001; Wigeld et al., 1996).
• In other words, both men and women miss the mark when it comes
to self-evaluation.
• These kinds of errors can result in lost opportunities, wasted time,
and poor choices.

Stereotype Threat
• Stereotype threat arises when people become
aware that they are negatively stereotyped in their
current role or activity.
• Negative stereotypes affect individuals’
performance when they attempt difficult tasks in
the domains in which they are negatively
stereotyped (Logel et al., 2012; Hoyt et al., 2010).
• Stereotype threat can reduce working memory
and, because of its relationship with stress,
anxiety, and disengagement, can lead to a wide
variety of negative attitudes and behaviors (Hoyt &
Blascovich, 2010).

• If women are assertive, it can be seen as aggressive. "It's a
Catch-22," says SonyaRhodes, Ph.D., a psychotherapist and author
of new book"The Alpha Woman Meets Her Match." "Whatever
women do at work, they have to do it nicely.But the more you back
off,the more they don't take you seriously." Women have to walk a
thin linebetween being too nice and too forceful.
• When women are successful, they're often called "bitchy" and
seen as less likable.In one well-known 2003 study,business
students were given two identical resumes, one using thename
Heidi and the other Howard."Howard was judged as terrifically
competent, but Heidi was judged as bitchy," says Rivers. When the
experiment was repeated 10 years later, the woman was found to be
slightly morelikable but less trustworthy than theman.
• Women are more likely to get lower initial offers. In another
study using identical resumes, female scientists were offered a
starting salary of $26,500,and men were offered $30,200."Hiring
managers will offer a slightly lower salary because they thinkthey
can get away with it," says Rhodes. And because women are often
so grateful to get theposition,she says they are less likely to
negotiatethe offer, which compounds and perpetuates the cycle of
lower pay.
• Women are less likely to get credit in group projects. When men
and women work together,the men are more likely to get the credit
— even if shedid the bulk of the work and he's junior,says Rivers. It
may be a combination of men being assumed more competent
andwomen not actively taking credit for their work. "Women
undersell themselves, and people undersell women," adds Rhodes.

• Women are assumed to be incompetent until they
prove themselves. As Linda Hudson, former CEO of
security and defense company BAE Systems, recently
told the authors of "The Confidence Code": "I think the
environment is such that even in the position I am now,
everyone's first impression is that I'm not qualified to do
the job. When a man walks into a room, they're assumed
to be competent until they prove otherwise." Women,
however, are automatically assumed to be incompetent.
• Women get promoted on performance, and men get
promoted on potential. Research shows that women
must prove that they are capable of succeeding in a role
before they are promoted into it, whereas men may be
promoted on their perceived potential. That means men
often move up faster in organizations. "When a men
walks in the door, he gets the benefit of male
stereotypes," says Rivers.
• Talkative men are seen as competent, and talkative
women as incompetent. A study comparing the
volubility of powerful men and women found that male
leaders talk more— and with good reason. When men
and women talked the same amount, she was seen as
significantly less competent and less suited to
leadership.

Unconscious bias
• When women show anger, they are often judged as too
emotional. Research shows that both men and women think
women should be nice and kind and nurturing, says Rivers,
and that men should be strong. When men show anger it
looks like strength,but when women do the same, they are
perceived as too emotional and out of control. "These
stereotypes are deeply ingrained," she says.
• Men get a fatherhood bonus, and women a motherhood
penalty. While employers believe men will put more effort
into succeeding at work once they become fathers, they
believe women will direct more effort towards their kids. "The
minute women become mothers, the attitude towards them
changes," Rivers says. "When women become mothers, they
suffer financially. Women make significantly less over a
lifetime."

Unconscious bias
• Women are often interrupted or ignored in meetings. Especially when there are only
one or two women around the table, their voices can easily go unheard. Rhodes says it's
very common that others may interrupt them, finish their sentences, or not give them the
focus and subtle encouragement to continue. More frustrating is when a woman offers her
idea, and no one responds. Then, a few minutes later, a man in the room presents the
same idea, and only then is it heard and received well. When Beth Brooke, global vice
chair at Ernst & Young, experienced this at a board meeting, she pulled the leader aside to
mention it, and he hadn't even noticed that it happened.
• When speaking in public, women have to take command of a room. Women
presenters at male-dominated events have a harder time getting the attention of the room,
says Rhodes. For example, one of her clients, a woman in her late 20s who works for a
financial company, says when she stands up to give a presentation, she can't get the guys
to settle down. "Women don't command that kind of attention," she says. "They have to
take control."
• Women may not be invited to social events. Getting together to drink, watch the game,
or play sports is typically how social bonds are formed at the office and when valuable
information, like who's position might be opening up or how to get in the graces of a
certain boss, is shared. When women aren't included in these events, says Rhodes, it can
marginalize them and limit their knowledge.

Unconscious bias
• Women are judged more harshly on their
appearance.
• In a major survey conducted by the Center
for Talent Innovation and detailed in the book
"Executive Presence," senior executives
listed twice as many appearance blunders
committed by women than men. Additionally,
women were judged more harshly. For
example, a woman might be seen as lacking
leadership skills if she's overweight, while a
man receives the same judgment if obese.

Institute of Leadership
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work
The overall picture from female managers is one of a
relative lack of career ambition or expectation, coupled
with lower levels of confidence and self-esteem.

Lower ambitions and
expectations
• In summary, the research reveals that women
managers are impeded in their careers by lower
ambitions and expectations. Compared to their male
counterparts, they tend to lack self-belief and
confidence – which leads to a cautious approach to
career opportunities – and follow a less
straightforward career path. The higher expectations
and increased confidence of
male managers propel them into management roles
on average three years earlier than women.
• We found that at the outset of their career women
have less clarity of career direction than men, and
lower career ambitions.
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

The ambition gap
• The career ambitions of women managers
also lag behind those of men.
• In general, women set their sights lower
than men do, and are more likely to limit
their ambitions to more junior ranks of
management.
• Fewer women than men expect to reach a
general manager or director level by the
end of their careers. Institute of Leadership
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

High expectations
of leadership and
management role
Low or no expectations
of leadership and
management role
Percentage
Figure 6: Levels of confidence and expectations
of reaching a leadership or management level
Whenyou started work, did you expect to take on a
management or leadership role?
0 20 40 60
Higher-confidence
women
Key Higher-confidence
men
Lower-confidence
women
Lower-confidence
men
59.0
18.0
67.0
11.0
30.0
38.0
37.0
24.0
0.7
0.5
I have a highlevel of
personal confidence
and rarely feel any
self-doubt
I have quite a high level of
personal confidence, but
occasionally have a few
doubts about myself
Percentage
Figure 5: Confidence
How best would you describe your own level
of personal confidence?
0 20 40
MenKey Women
I feel fairly
self-confident but do
suffer doubts about
myself as well
I do tend to lack
self-confidence and
can feel real doubts
about myself
Ireallylackself-
confidenceandhave
severedoubtsabout
myself
15.7
53.6
25.3
4.7
4.7
45.1
40.9
8.8
24%
of women under 30 expect to
start their own business within
10 years
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

Female managers also have
lower career confidence.
• Men are more confident across all age groups,
with 70% of men having high or quite high levels
of self-confidence, compared to 50% of women.
• Half of women managers admit to feelings of self-
doubt, but only 31% of men do.
• We also found that women with low confidence
have lower expectations of reaching a leadership
and management role and are actually less likely
to achieve their career ambitions.
• This lack of confidence is evident in women’s
more cautious approach to applying for jobs or
promotions.
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

are childless, compared to 28% of
men, shows the difﬁcult choice
facing female managers who
aspire to senior positions. The
Taking charge While women
display little expectation of
becoming senior managers later in
their careers, they are more likely
This suggests women increasingly
see enterprise as offering
greater opportunities than
employment, perhaps in terms
High expectations
of leadership and
management role
Low or no expectations
of leadership and
management role
Percentage
Figure 6: Levels of confidence and expectations
of reaching a leadership or management level
Whenyou started work, did you expect to take on a
management or leadership role?
0 20 40 60
Higher-confidence
women
Key Higher-confidence
men
Lower-confidence
women
Lower-confidence
men
59.0
18.0
67.0
11.0
30.0
38.0
37.0
24.0
0.7
0.5
I have a highlevel of
personal confidence
and rarely feel any
self-doubt
I have quite a high level of
personal confidence, but
occasionally have a few
doubts about myself
Percentage
Figure 5: Confidence
How best would you describe your own level
of personal confidence?
0 20 40
MenKey Women
I feel fairly
self-confident but do
suffer doubts about
myself as well
I do tend to lack
self-confidence and
can feel real doubts
about myself
Ireallylackself-
confidenceandhave
severedoubtsabout
myself
15.7
53.6
25.3
4.7
4.7
45.1
40.9
8.8
24of women under 30 expect to
start their own business within
10 years
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

Career leaves
• Women are also more likely than men to
voluntarily step off the career ladder,
impeding their progress:
– 42% had taken statutory maternity leave, and
21% had left work to care for children;
– only 9% of men had taken paternity leave, and
just 2% had left work to care for children.
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

A closer look
at the corporate
pipeline
Based on employee pipeline data from 132 companies, two
broad themes emerge this year: (1 ) On average, women
are promoted and hired at lower rates than men, so far
fewer women become senior leaders. (2) At more senior
levels, we see women shift from line to staff roles, so very
few end up on the path to becoming CEO.
4 | WOMEN IN THE WORKPLACE: CORPORATE PIPELINE
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

as directors—and more
than three times as many
are hired as SVPs.
women from the outside than men, and this is especially pronounced in
senior management.
However, there is reason for optimism. The percentage of women
being promoted into middle and senior management is higher than
the percentage of women currently at those levels. If this pattern holds
over time, the representation of mid- and senior-level women will
slowly increase.
GAP IN RATE OF FIRST PROMOTIONS
FOR EVERY 100 WOMEN PROMOTED TO MANAGER, 130 MEN ARE PROMOTED
WOMEN MEN
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

7 Includes respondents who feel this “often” or “very often” applies to them. 8 Includes respondents who reported they have received
this opportunity in the past two years. 9 Includes respondents who “agree” or “strongly agree” with this statement.
meaningfully in meetings7
challenging assignment8
49% 54%
Are turned to for input on
important decisions7
56% 63%
Believe their contributions are
appropriately valued7
54%
44%
The best opportunities
go to the most deserving
employees9
They have the same
opportunity for growth as
their peers9
Their gender will make it harder
to get a raise, promotion, or
chance to get ahead
% OF WOMEN AND MEN WHO THINK . . .
61%
54%
12%
33%
. . . AND ARE MORE LIKELY TO QUESTION THE FAIRNESS OF THE WORKPLACEWomen
in the
Workplace
2016

average are less likely
to be promoted.
The bad news is that women who negotiate10
are disproportionately
penalized for it. They are 30 percent more likely than men who
negotiate to receive feedback that they are “intimidating,” “too
aggressive,” or “bossy” and 67 percent more likely than women who
don’t negotiate to receive the same negative feedback. Moreover,
despite lobbying for promotions at similar rates, women are on average
less likely to be promoted than men.
HOW OFTEN WOMEN AND MEN NEGOTIATE—AND THE RESULTING PUSHBACK11
WOMEN MEN
% OF WOMEN AND MEN WHO . . .
39%
36%
Lobbied for a
promotion or new
assignment12
29%
27%
Asked for an increase
in compensation12
30
23
“BOSSY”
“AGGRESSIVE”
“INTIMIDATING”
30%
23%
% OF WOMEN AND MEN WHO NEGOTIATED AND
RECEIVED FEEDBACK THAT THEY WERE . . .
10 Women who say they lobbied for a promotion or an increase in their compensation in the last two years. 11 Based on employees’ self-reported experiences.
12 In the past 2 years.
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

Women anticipate a steeper path to the top. Women who aspire to
become a top executive are less likely to think they’ll get there than men
with the same aspiration—and more likely to worry they won’t be able to
manage work and family commitments.
Women and men also see many of the same beneﬁts of becoming a
top executive, including higher compensation and more opportunities
to mentor, with one important exception: men see greater potential to
impact the business. This could be rooted in the different experiences
women and men are having in the workplace. Women may not think their
ideas and contributions carry the same weight as men’s.
GAP IN LEADERSHIP AMBITION WOMEN MEN
% OF WOMEN AND MEN WHO WANT TO BE
A TOP EXECUTIVE AND BELIEVE IT’S
LIKELY THEY’LL BECOME ONE
32%
24%
% OF WOMEN AND MEN WHO WANT TO . . .
Get promoted to the next level Become a top executive
80%
74%
56%
40%
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

Men will also benefit from a
broader definition of leadership
Creating a more inclusive workplace is important for women and men.
Only about half of men say their companies embrace diverse leadership
styles, and the reasons men point to as barriers to advancement are
telling. Twenty-one percent of men don’t want to be a top executive
because it’s not consistent with who they are as a person, while almost
a third of men who aspire to reach the top don’t think they’ll make it
because they lack “the typical style of a top executive.”
WHY WOMEN AND MEN DON’T WANT TO BE A TOP EXECUTIVE WOMEN MEN
I wouldn’t be able to balance
family and work commitments
Too much politics
I am not interested in that
type of work
I don’t want the pressure
Not enough benefits for the
personal costs
It’s not consistent with
who I am
I’m not confident that I would be
successful
42%
42%
39%
40%
35%
37%
32%
21%
21%
21%
15%
21%
13%
13%
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

People who do more work at
home are less interested in
becoming top executives
At every stage in their careers, women do more
housework and child care than men—and there appears to
be a link between the amount of work people do at home
and their leadership ambition. While 43 percent of women
who share responsibilities evenly with their partner aspire
to become top executives, only 34 percent of women
who do a majority of housework and child care have the
same aspiration. This trend holds true for men: the more
work they do at home, the less interested they are in very
senior leadership.
Women in senior
management are seven
times more likely than
men at the same level to
say they do more than
half of the housework.
People who do more work at
home are less interested in
becoming top executives
At every stage in their careers, women do more
housework and child care than men—and there appears to
be a link between the amount of work people do at home
and their leadership ambition. While 43 percent of women
who share responsibilities evenly with their partner aspire
to become top executives, only 34 percent of women
who do a majority of housework and child care have the
same aspiration. This trend holds true for men: the more
work they do at home, the less interested they are in very
senior leadership.
Women in senior
management are seven
times more likely than
men at the same level to
say they do more than
half of the housework.
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

Means placing a lower
priority on individual
performance
Means favoritism to some
people over others
Other more pressing
issues require attention
Diversity efforts
highlight differences, not
commonalities
I don’t see the value
44%
53%
27%
44%
28%
24%
20%
23%
20%
18%
TOP 5 REASONS WHY EMPLOYEES DON’T
PRIORITIZE GENDER DIVERSITY
% OF EMPLOYEES WHO THINK GENDER DIVERSITY
IS AN IMPORTANT PERSONAL PRIORITY
48%
ENTRY
LEVEL
54%
MIDDLE
MANAGEMENT
SENIOR
MANAGEMENT
62%
ALL
EMPLOYEES
52%
COMPANIES ARE STRUGGLING TO PUT THEIR COMMITMENT INTO PRACTICE . . . WOMEN MEN
% OF EMPLOYEES WHO OFTEN OR ALMOST ALWAYS OBSERVE PRACTICES TO IMPROVE GENDER DIVERSITY
Senior leaders
communicate the
importance of
gender diversity
Senior leaders
encourage candid,
open dialogue on
gender diversity
Senior leaders are
held accountable
for improving
gender diversity
Progress on gender
diversity is measured
and shared across
the company
Managers are
recognized for
making progress on
gender diversity
24%
38%
24%
34%
29%
36%
18%
26%
7%
12%
50%
% OF EMPLOYEES WHO OFTEN OR ALMOST ALWAYS SEE PRACTICES INTENDED TO IMPROVE GENDER DIVERSITY
. . . AND MANY EMPLOYEES ARE NOT ON BOARD WOMEN MEN
100%
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

consistently applied criteria to evaluate performance, but only
57 percent of employees report managers do this in practice.
Companies should review their policies for hiring, promotions,
and performance reviews to make sure there aren’t any gaps
in these end-to-end processes and look for opportunities to
further reduce bias and foster diversity. For example, blind
résumé reviews are a relatively simple way to minimize bias,
yet only 4 percent of companies say they do this.
promotions, yet fewer than half of
companies require diverse slates
of candidates.
POLICIES THAT COMPANIES HAVE IN PLACE COMPANIES EMPLOYEES
91%
56%
Clear and consistently applied criteria for
evaluating candidates
73%
46%
16%
93%
37%
58%
76%
Review of job descriptions for biased
language
Dedicated outreach to underrepresented
groups
Mandated slates of diverse candidates for
new hires
Clear and consistently applied criteria for
performance reviews
Mandated slates of diverse candidates for
internal positions
Third-party review of performance
feedback to ensure fairness
Formal process for dispute resolution in
the review process
HIRING POLICIES
PERFORMANCE REVIEW POLICIES
COMPANIES THAT SAY THEY USE
CLEAR CRITERIA VS. EMPLOYEES
WHO SEE THEM IN PRACTICE15
93%
57%
% OF COMPANIES WITH POLICIES IN PLACE
15 Includes companies that report they use clear and consistently applied criteria for performance reviews versus employees who report that managers often or almost
always evaluate employee performance using standardized, clear, and objective metrics.
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

of companies offer anti-harassment/discrimination training, far fewer
offer employees bias training for hiring (67 percent) and performance
reviews (56 percent). When employees don’t understand how bias
works, they are less likely to make fair and accurate decisions and push
back on bias when they see it. As evidence of this, only 24 percent of
employees report that managers regularly challenge gender-biased
language and behavior.
A LACK OF KNOWLEDGE LEADS TO A LACK OF ACTION
% OF EMPLOYEES WHO SAY THEY SEE MANAGERS
CHALLENGE GENDER-BIASED LANGUAGE OR BEHAVIOR16
24%
% OF MANAGERS WHO SAY THEY KNOW WHAT TO DO
TO IMPROVE GENDER DIVERSITY
51%
16 Based on employees who report that managers often or almost always challenge gender-biased language or behavior.
MANAGERS EMPLOYEES
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

Although most companies track metrics on women’s representation,
targets are far less common. Only 44 percent of companies set pipeline
targets, and even fewer set targets for external hiring and promotions.
And targets matter—it is easier to track and make progress when a
company has clear goals in place.
% OF COMPANIES THAT TRACK . . .
COMPANIES THAT TRACK GENDER METRICS COMPANIES
91%
79%
Gender representation by level
60%
58%
34%
Attrition by gender
Gender representation at
promotion rounds
Salary differences in comparable
positions by gender
Bonuses in comparable positions
by gender
15%
Assignment of high-visibility projects
by gender
72%
Gender representation of external
candidates for hire
Women
in the
Workplace
2016

Which strategies follow to
get more women at the top?
Time will not solve the gender
leadership gap; action will.

117 years until
gender parity?
Put gender on
your agenda.
In its Global Gender Parity Report 2015, the
World Economic Forum estimates it will take
117 years to achieve gender parity in the
workplace. How can we accelerate this pace?
We surveyed men and women leaders from
400 companies around the world to help
illuminate the way forward and blended their
recommendations with our experience to
create the following accelerators.
Accommodate
work/life integration
for all
Speed up company
culture change
with progressive
corporate policy
for advancement,
make role models
visible and set
leadership pipeline
programs and targets
Make a difference
through tone-at-the-
top, sponsorship for
promotions and
education about
conscious and
unconscious bias
Build supportive environments
Illuminate
the path to
leadership
Accelerators How
© 2016 EYGM Limited. All Rights Reserved. EYG no. EX0263 ED none
Women. Fast forward
Eighty years until gender parity?
Pledge your support to speed up the clock.
#WomenFastForward ey.com/womenfastforward
Three accelerators for women in the workplace How you can take
action today:
• Visit us online at
ey.com/womenfastforward
• Tweet using #WomenFastForward
• Follow the story on Flipboard
• Join the conversation on LinkedIn
linkedIn.com/company/
women-fast-forward
• Visit internationalwomensday.com

35AAUW
There is no magic bullet to solve the leadership gap, but this problem
does not require magic. There are many commonsense steps we can take
as individuals, employers, and policy makers to create significant change.
Drawing from the research examined in this report, we offer the following
recommendations.
INDIVIDUALS
Become a student of leadership.
There are thousands of academic and popular books, journals, and webi-
nars for women seeking leadership roles in business, politics, education, and
a host of other fields. This report does not endorse any particular approach;
instead, we recommend that women immerse themselves in the leadership
literature most relevant to their own career paths.
Seek evidence-based leadership training.
Focused, interactive training can be empowering when implemented well.
For example, AAUW’s Elect Her program trains college women to run for
office on campus and beyond. AAUW also holds an annual National Con-
ference for College Women Student Leaders, which brings together nearly
1,000 women to hone their leadership skills, learn about public policy issues
facing women today, participate in a career and graduate school fair, and
network with the AAUW community.
Seek out employers that promote women’s leadership.
Before you join a company, take a look around: Do you see women and
people of color in leadership roles? Blazing a trail is a possibility, but it can
be challenging.
Look for volunteer opportunities that include leadership skill
development.
This report focuses on positional leadership, but there are many types of
leadership. Volunteer leaders have been involved in building schools, librar-
ies, and hospitals; they have fought for civil rights and advocated for children
and the poor. Volunteering can be a wonderful way to develop your leader-
ship skills while helping to make a difference in the world.
EMPLOYERS
Offer flexible schedules.
Some jobs do require fixed times and places. But employers can change
the default rules that govern offices and many other workplaces so that all
employees have the flexibility to work at times and places that mesh with
35AAUW
HOW DO WE CLOSE
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?
recommendations.
INDIVIDUALS

Ask for more.
Learn and practice negotiation skills to ensure that salaries and benefits start
fair and stay fair. AAUW Start Smart and AAUW Work Smart salary nego-
tiation workshops teach women effective techniques to negotiate their salary
and benefits at different stages of their careers.
Find a sponsor or become one.
Investing in the next generation of leaders takes time and effort. Be on the
lookout for opportunities to learn from people in leadership positions, and
as you advance in your field, make it your responsibility to invest in future
leaders.
Explore and address your biases.
We all have implicit biases that are in conflict with our conscious beliefs.
Find out about your biases and learn some practical tips for avoiding the
mental shortcuts that can lead to unfounded judgments. Visit the AAUW
website and take our gender and leadership Implicit Association Test.
Understand stereotype threat.
Simply knowing about stereotype threat can help diminish its effect on
you. Role models can be helpful in countering stereotypes. Encouraging a
“growth mindset” in yourself—that is, the belief that your mind is always
learning and growing—can serve as a defense against the notion of fixed
capabilities, which is at the core of stereotype threat.
Set leadership goals.
When women don’t meet all the qualifications for a position, they are less
likely than men to pursue it. Even if you don’t want to pursue leadership
roles at this stage of your life, look ahead to opportunities that are on the
horizon.
Plan for potential career interruptions.
Work-family balance can be difficult for anyone to achieve. Although
women are still more likely than men to handle the housework and care-
giving, men are increasingly taking on these roles. Taking time out of the
workforce can be the right decision for both men and women.
35AAUW
HOW DO WE CLOSE
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?
recommendations.
INDIVIDUALS

37AAUW
and the poor. Volunteering can be a wonderful way to develop your leader-
ship skills while helping to make a difference in the world.
EMPLOYERS
Offer flexible schedules.
Some jobs do require fixed times and places. But employers can change
the default rules that govern offices and many other workplaces so that all
employees have the flexibility to work at times and places that mesh with
family caretaking responsibilities. Schedule conferences and important meet-
ings during core working hours to accommodate employees’ personal needs.
Focus on productivity, not face time.
The notion that “face time” (arriving at work early and leaving late) and
frequent travel will prime employees to become effective leaders is simply
misplaced. When managers focus on and recognize employees’ contribu-
tions rather than watching the clock, productivity and morale may improve.
Offer evidence-based diversity training.
Diversity training programs should reflect best practices. While there are
many programs available, employers should look for those that take into
account the latest evidence-based findings about bias and stereotypes.
Actively encourage sponsorship programs.
While mentoring programs can be useful, sponsorship involves the sharing
of credibility and standing in the field.
Design better human resource materials.
Bias affects different groups differently, and too often practices do not reflect
individuals’ real experience of gender, racial, and ethnic bias. Policies and
programs designed to reduce bias, such as blind review of résumés, can limit
bias in crucial aspects of the hiring process.
POLICY MAKERS
Tackle persistent sex discrimination.
The gender imbalance in leadership can only be solved by creating an
equitable workplace. Enforcement agencies like the U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the U.S. Department of Justice need
adequate resources to enforce existing civil rights laws so that employers can
get the technical assistance they need and employees can get meaningful
access to the protections they deserve.
Strengthen pay equity laws.
35AAUW
HOW DO WE CLOSE
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?
recommendations.
INDIVIDUALS

Design better human resource materials.
Bias affects different groups differently, and too often practices do not reflect
individuals’ real experience of gender, racial, and ethnic bias. Policies and
programs designed to reduce bias, such as blind review of résumés, can limit
bias in crucial aspects of the hiring process.
POLICY MAKERS
Tackle persistent sex discrimination.
The gender imbalance in leadership can only be solved by creating an
equitable workplace. Enforcement agencies like the U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the U.S. Department of Justice need
adequate resources to enforce existing civil rights laws so that employers can
get the technical assistance they need and employees can get meaningful
access to the protections they deserve.
Strengthen pay equity laws.
Passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act would create incentives for employers
to follow the law, empower women to negotiate for equal pay, and enforce
the laws we already have. State and local policy makers can follow the lead
of states like California and Massachusetts and strengthen their state’s equal
pay provisions.
Increase salary transparency.
The federal government is helping to fight the pay gap by making sure
federal contractors do not retaliate against employees who share salary
information. In addition, the U.S. Department of Labor and the EEOC
must finalize and implement new regulations to collect wage data by gender
and race from employers. These data will provide better insight into the
wage gap and discriminatory pay practices that hold women back across
industries and occupations.
35AAUW
HOW DO WE CLOSE
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?
recommendations.
INDIVIDUALS

Strengthen leave policies.
While some employers choose to provide these protections as a benefit to
some or all employees, many U.S. workers do not have guaranteed paid
annual leave, paid time off for illness or family care, or paid parental leave.
Without these policies, caregiving responsibilities can hinder women’s career
trajectories and leadership opportunities. The Family and Medical Insur-
ance Leave Act would establish paid medical and parental leave for all
workers, and the Healthy Families Act would allow workers to earn paid sick
days to cover temporary and minor illnesses and caregiving. State and local
policy makers can also pass laws that set these standards for all workers.
Update laws to protect pregnant workers.
Pregnancy should not prevent a woman from pursuing her career. The
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act would require employers to make reasonable
accommodations to protect the health of pregnant workers and ensure that
they are not forced out of their jobs or denied leadership opportunities.
Support educational programs for women seeking high-wage jobs.
Jobs that have been traditionally held by men tend to be in high-wage, high-
growth fields. Educational programs that provide bias-free counseling and
promote gender equity can encourage effective workplace culture change.
Fully enforce Title IX.
Title IX prohibits sex discrimination in education, including discriminatory
policies in admissions, recruitment, counseling, and athletics and in address-
ing the persistent sexual harassment and violence in our schools. These
factors all limit women’s ability to complete their education and pursue lead-
ership opportunities. The U.S. Department of Education needs adequate
funding to provide technical assistance and to fully enforce the law. The
High School Data Transparency Act would help schools, parents, students,
and community members ensure the promise of Title IX by making infor-
mation about gender and sports in high schools publicly available.
35AAUW
HOW DO WE CLOSE
THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?
recommendations.
INDIVIDUALS

HAVE ANY STRATEGIES ALREADY HELPED
NARROW THE GENDER LEADERSHIP GAP?
Training
Implicit Association Testing
Gender Quotas and Hiring Goals
Employment Practice Reforms
Role Models
HOW DO WE CLOSE THE GENDER
LEADERSHIP GAP?
Individuals
Employers
27
27
30
31
31
32
35
35
37

Exposure to counterstereotypical role models
can actually reduce the effects of stereotypical
thinking
• Women’s advancement is strongly linked
to board gender diversity (Skaggs et al.,
2012).
• When women are in top leadership
positions, women are more likely to be
promoted to leadership.

Role models and mentors
• Frequent, high-quality interactions with successful female role
models have been shown to improve college women’s self-
concepts of their leadership abilities and career ambitions (Asgari et
al., 2012).
• Employers can benefit from raising the pro le, voice and visibility of
successful women leaders across the organisation as a whole
through internal communications, networking and development
events, and leveraging their experience to help nurture other
women managers.
• Mentoring programmes also have an important role to play in
raising women managers’ aspirations and self-confidence, and
driving their leadership development. Employers should look to
identify successful leaders of both sexes to serve as mentors to
female managers and provide advice and encouragement based on
their own experience, helping them build networks and encouraging
them to seize career opportunities. Institute of Leadership
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

Employment practice reforms
• Research has shown that education alone is not
enough to remedy historical inequities in the
workplace. For meaningful progress, managers
must be held accountable, especially for
promoting women and men of color into leader-
ship positions (Duguid & Thomas-Hunt, 2015).
• Job descriptions using gender-neutral language
(so as not to imply that one gender or another is
better suited for a position) have also been shown
to make a positive di erence (Lennon et al., 2013).
• The recommendation process is especially
fraught with opportunities for bias.

Coaching confidence
• Powerful way to build managers’ self-
belief, crystallise career ambitions and
encourage them to take measured risks.
• Creating a safe setting—a coaching
relationship, a women’s leadership
program, a support group of peers—in
which women can interpret these
messages is critical to their leadership
identity development. Institute of Leadership
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

Talent management
• We know that women are more hesitant than men when
applying for new positions. While men are willing to take
greater risks when applying for stretching jobs, women are
more risk averse, preferring to apply for roles where they are
satisfied they meet the job description.
• To counteract this, organisations should consider structuring
their talent management systems to ensure that the most
talented individuals – including women managers – are
proactively identified and encouraged to apply for leadership
positions.
• Open advertising for internal positions may not necessarily
produce the best person for a role. Personalised
development and support programmes for these pre-
selected employees can help women set more ambitious
goals and stretch assignments, and support and encourage
greater risk taking.
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

Flexible attitudes
• Women are far more likely than men to leave the
career ladder in order to raise families, pursue
education and tackle other interests. This often
capsizes women’s careers and places them at a
disadvantage when chasing senior leadership and
management positions.
• An emphasis on ‘anytime, anywhere’ availability and
linear career paths is clearly not compatible with the
roles many people with family demands are likely to
pursue. Flexible working and work-life balance
policies have a huge part to play in helping women
align a more fragmented career route with senior
management responsibilities. Institute of Leadership
& Management
Ambition
and gender
at work

Three actions we suggest to support
women’s access to leadership positions
• Educate women and men about second-
generation gender bias,
• Create safe “identity workspaces” to
support transitions to bigger roles,
• Anchor women’s development efforts in a
sense of leadership purpose rather than in
how women are perceived.

Women in Leadership: Why It MattersWomen in Leadership: Why It Matters

83%
89%
Women
77%
Men
Total
More than 8 in 10 Americans
believe that not having women in leadership positions as role
models fails to inspire women and has contributed to preventing
women from securing top leadership positions.
On a more personal note, a striking majority of
Americans (81%) say that if a daughter of theirs were
to pursue a leadership position in a business of her
choice, they would feel confident in her abilities to
succeed, and three-quarters (76%, rising to 82%
among women) think it would be helpful for her to
have female role models in her aspired positions to
help her reach her goal. But in reflecting their aware-
ness of the barriers facing women in business, just
60% think that it’s realistic that she would actually
be able to reach that top position, despite the
confidence they personally have in her abilities.
Women role models are uniquely important—among
those who have had mentors that supported them in
the workplace, majorities of men and women alike say
their mentor was the same gender as them, suggesting
the need for, and potential influence of, more women
in top positions. Specifically, among women who had
mentors in the workplace, nearly two-thirds (63%) say
that their mentor was another woman, rising to 72%
among millennial women who have had mentors,
Women in leadership offer uniquely important mentorship
Women need role models
The only way to address and overcome these pre-
conceptions and barriers is to have more women in
positions of leadership; providing the support and
role models women desperately need to advance
in their careers, and bringing about much-needed
changes in the workplace benefitting both genders.
And Americans are on board. Two-thirds (65%) say
it’s highly important to them that younger women
starting their careers have more women in leadership
positions as role models. This desire is especially
intense among millennial women (82% of women
younger than 35), compared with 74% among
women 35-54 years old, and even lower (67%)
among women 55 or older.
18-34y/o
women
82%
35-54 y/o
women74%
55+ y/o
women
67%
2/3 of Americans
say it is especially important for women starting their careers to have
women in leadership positions as role models.
There is an appetite and a readiness to change work-
place cultures contributing to gender inequities, and
Americans believe that businesses have a crucial role
to play to impact change. Broad majorities agree that
businesses have a responsibility to provide career
development resources to their female employees
(88%, including 87% of men and 88% of women alike)
and to actively recruit women into leadership positions
(84%, including 81% of men and 86% of women).
Notably, some occupational fields are more hospitable
to women leaders than others: Perceived barriers for
women are larger in particular sectors, with a majority
(62%) of Americans saying that women have fewer
opportunities than men in corporate America to serve
in leadership positions. Government (55%) and
In addition to inspiring and empowering women in
their careers, sizable majorities think that having more
women in leadership positions would have significant
positive impacts in the workplace, including: helping to
reduce the pay gap between men and women doing
the same work (76%), changing workplace policies in
ways that benefit both men and women (74%), and
attracting a more diverse workforce (71%).
Women in leadership have a positive impact on
workplace policies
More than 70% of Americans say that having more women
in leadership positions would have significant impacts,
The presence of women in leadership positions is
an important consideration to Americans in choosing
where to work—two-thirds (67%) say it’s at least some-
what important to them, rising to 76% among women,
suggesting that businesses’ efforts would help recruit
and retain the talent that is crucial to the success of
their organizations.

Portray inspiring stories of
women leaders
Because you can’t be what you
can’t see

First full female crew flying on
Ethiopian airlines

Brunei crew landing in Saudi
Arabia where women are not
allowed to drive

A recruiting website dedicated to
female employees in Saudi Arabia

Apres facilitates the reintegration of
women in the workforce

Femmes d’Avenir Mediterranee

Bring up your kids
consciously

4 MAKING CARING COMMON | A Project of the Harvard Graduate School of Education
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations for parents,
educators, and other adults are based on the
beliefs that good intentions are not enough to
prevent leadership or other types of biases and
that biases can’t easily or simply be eliminated.
Reducing and preventing biases is a practice
that we as adults need to model as well as
cultivate in children and teens.
2.Cultivate Family Practices
that Prevent and Reduce Bias
Biases often take root early in childhood.
Parents and other adults can help prevent
leadership and other biases from forming in
children by developing reflexes and practices
in both ourselves and our children that stem
gender biases. We can, for example, provide
children with gender-neutral toys, games, and
clothes and orchestrate tasks and activities
in ways that don’t reinforce traditional gender
stereotypes. A chore wheel, for example, which
boys and girls spin to see who does what family
chores, can prevent boys and girls from falling
into familiar gender-based family roles. We can
ask girls to imagine themselves as senators,
sports team managers, and business leaders,
and we can ask boys to imagine themselves
as child care directors or school arts program
directors. We can work to expose girls and
boys to culturally diverse women who model
constructive leadership. As parents, we can
periodically ask teens whether they think their
school—or our family—is modeling gender
equality and brainstorm with them what they
or others might do about perceived inequities
and biases.
3.Teach Teens to Spot and Eﬀectively
Confront Stereotypes and Discrimination
Girls are bombarded with constricting, demeaning images and stereotypes of females both in their daily
interactions and in the media and culture that can erode their confidence in their leadership and negatively
affect every corner of their lives (Levin & Kilbourne, 2008; Sax, 2010). These images also cultivate and
reinforce boys’ biases. Adults need to mobilize girls and boys to both identify and actively combat these
biases. We can, for example, ask girls and boys to identify denigrating images and messages in television
and games—we might ask teens to count the number of male versus female leaders they see on television.
We can brainstorm with children strategies for dealing with their peers’ gender biases, and recognize
children who stand up to gender bias.
1. Check your own Biases
Preventing gender biases in teens and
children means first understanding and managing
our own biases. Parents’ and teachers’ biases
can deeply influence what they model for children
and how they facilitate children’s daily lives. Do
we inadvertently reinforce traditional gender roles,
assigning girls caretaking tasks more than boys,
for instance, or criticizing girls more than boys if
they are arrogant or “bossy?” Are we as active in
promoting and recognizing assertiveness in girls
as we are in boys? Are we modeling nontraditional
gender roles? At times it’s also important for us
to seek feedback from those we trust and respect
about whether we are expressing biases.

Leaning Out | Teen Girls and Leadership Biases 5
7. Use this Report to
Spur Discussion
Ask teens how they understand the
data reported here and facilitate
discussions with teens about how
to achieve greater gender equity
at school and/or in the larger
society. Have teens interview each
other across gender and racial
groups about their aspirations for
leadership of various kinds: If you
could be a leader, what would you
want to be a leader of? Why? For a
guide to discussing this report with
teenagers, see Appendix B.
4.Don’t Just Let “Boys be Boys.”
Girls’ confidence in their leadership and self-worth can
be eroded by the degradations they experience in their daily
interactions with boys, including sexual harassment and other
forms of misogyny. Ironically, at the same time that more teen
girls and young women outpace males in school and work, high
percentages of young women face degradation in their romantic
and sexual relationships (Khazan, 2015; Kimmel, 2009; Hill &
Kearl, 2011). Yet too many adults are passive even when these
denigrations are in their midst. Adults should be alert to and
challenge these affronts by, for example, pointing out to boys the
false bravado in degrading girls and the real strength and honor
in defying one’s peers when they devalue girls in general or divide
girls into “good girls” and “bad girls.”
5.Challenge Teens’ Biased Assumptions
and Beliefs
Teens’ biases are often explicit and inherent in their basic beliefs.
For example, many teens believe that males are better political
leaders and females are better child care directors. It’s imperative
that adults constructively challenge these beliefs, but this is
delicate work, because it’s important not to shame teens who
hold these beliefs. Instead, we can, ask teens to consider on what
basis these judgments are made and to question the “evidence”
supporting these beliefs.
6.Use Programs and Strategies that Build
Girls’ Leadership Skills
While a wide variety of programs and interventions directly or
indirectly foster leadership skills in young girls—and some
programs seek to prepare girls specifically for political roles and
civic leadership—high percentages of girls don’t participate in
these programs or don’t have access to high quality programs.
For a list of promising programs and resources, please see
Appendix E For a list of the key ingredients of effective programs
and strategies, see Appendix A.
PHOTOCREDIT:STEVENDEPOLO

SONPREVENTINGANDREDUCINGGENDERBIAS
TRY THIS (CONT’):
• Help girls develop specific leadership skills.
Give girls chances to practice public speaking, to participate in decision-making processes, to work in
teams, and to give and receive feedback. Invite them to practice these skills in decisions your family
makes, for example, or encourage them to take action on problems they’re concerned about in their
schools and communities.
• Talk to girls about their fears.
Start conversations with girls about the things they feel hold them back from leadership. Model for them
that it’s okay to feel nervous or worried about how they’ll be perceived or the reactions they may get when
in leadership roles. Explore with girls various strategies for dealing with disapproval and criticism. Consider
with girls how they might engage peers as supporters and allies when they face disapproval.
• Encourage girls to lead in collaboration with diverse groups of girls.
Collaboration and teamwork are essential skills for leadership in today’s workplace, helping to develop
social awareness, problem-solving abilities, perspective-taking and other key skills. And working in racial
and economically diverse groups can enrich girls’ understandings of different cultures, expose girls to a
wide range of leadership styles and abilities, and enable girls to draw on various kinds of cultural wisdom
about leadership.

Leadership
Tips for
Parents
Brought to
you by LeanIn.Org
& Girl Scouts
of the USA

1. Encourage Girls
and Boys Equally to Lead
THE SITUATION >
Parents and grandparents are crucial architects of
a girl’s leadership potential. Yet as early as middle
school, parents place a higher value on leadership
for boys than for girls.3
THE SOLUTION >
Reﬂect on the different messages you may be giving
a daughter or son about ambition, future success,
and leadership. Parents can legitimize a girl’s most
ambitious dreams with acknowledgment and
encouragement. Ask your daughter how she
would change the world. Invite her to tell you what
leadership means to her. Does she see herself as a
leader? What are the ways she leads now, and in
what ways would she like to lead more in the future?
#BANBOSSY banbossy.com girlscouts.org/banbossy
DID YOU KNOW?
In a comprehensive study of
adolescents and their families,
parents of seventh graders
placed greater importance on
leadership for boys
thanfor girls.4
4

Why we need more women leaders

Why we need more women leaders

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Why we need more women leaders

Similar to Why we need more women leaders (20)

More from Shiftbalance

More from Shiftbalance (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (16)

Why we need more women leaders