There has been recent industry debate on the value of training programs to support women in and on leadership pathways. Not that the programs out there aren’t significant, it’s more a question of whether they are effective in improving outcomes for women.
It’s a debate that comes at a particularly fraught time for women, with wider societal context casting a pall over what would otherwise be a spirited discourse.
Women leaders face more pressures than ever
It’s 2024, but the data doesn’t feel that way. The latest Financy Women’s Index indicates that economic equality took a step backwards in 2023, with female underemployment hitting a two-year high, and an increasing number of women finding it hard to work to their desired potential (Financy, 2024).
We saw a deterioration in gender pay gaps too, with a nationwide average pay gap of 14.5 per cent. In extreme occasions, some of the country’s largest brands were outed as paying women less than 50 cents for every dollar a man in the company earns (Ziffer, 2024).
This echoes the Australian Government’s Workplace Gender Equality Agency’s (WGEA) 2022-23 Gender Equality Scorecard demonstration of a severe underrepresentation of women in leadership roles. Data shows that the vast majority of executive and management positions are still being held by men, with women only accounting for 22% of CEO roles (WGEA, 2024).
It feels like that, despite all the progress made to date, society has begun to backtrack.
The barriers facing women in leadership
It’s a problem that needs to be solved, but it seems to have fallen into a binary. We either need to look at fixing the societal problems first—or fixing women. However, a binary debate lacks nuance and fails to take into account the multiple and intersecting factors at play.
The systemic barriers
Arguably, by fixing the broader systemic barriers first, we can make change happen faster.
And they’re not new barriers. Unfortunately, women in leadership have been facing them for decades.
It’s things like inherent gender biases. Many women will know too well how these biases can manifest, like being mistaken for holding a junior position, just because they are the only woman in the room.
Over time, the weight of these biases adds up and can reflect a deeply-held belief that women are less likely to be leaders. Women start to believe it themselves, creating self-limiting beliefs that only serve to perpetuate the stereotypes.
If it’s not the inherent gender biases, it’s the opposite, with women getting thrust into leadership roles in times of crisis. Times that would be difficult enough for anyone to succeed, yet as women, the expectations and scrutiny are much higher.
The recruitment systems used can also give subtle signals that may deter women from even applying for leadership roles in the first place.
The perceptions that women hold about a role can stem from a variety of signals, from first impressions of the role to the anticipated work environment. The language used in job advertisements can be gendered, such as using wording that is typically masculine, which may deter women from applying for the role (Hentschel et al., 2021; Foley et al., 2019).
The impression of a work environment to favour men may also be more pronounced in male-dominated industries, with businesses that have more men in leadership roles tending to, whether by conscious effort or not, make it more difficult for women to join their ranks (Clarke, 2020). These signals can make women feel like they don’t belong in the role, and less likely to apply for it—despite being just as qualified and ready to be a leader.
Another recruitment practice that has become more common with the movement for gender-quality is gender-based recruitment targets. Which, on paper, help to promote equality. But in practice, do they?
Targets have been shown to increase gender diversity within organisations. However, this is different to their experiences once in the role, such as the level of continued support for diversity and inclusion (Gould et al. 2023).
Each of these intersecting issues are part of a bigger, systemic, problem, and a higher barrier for women entering leadership roles.
The burden on women leaders
The other side of this discussion is that women need to fix themselves, that they’re in some way at a deficit. And while support and guidance in ways to grow and improve isn’t a bad thing, when framed like this, at best it’s condescending—and at worst, actively damaging (Ryan and Morgenroth, 2024).
The very real outcome here is that women need to work harder to secure leadership roles, and work harder still within them to achieve even a base level of the same perception that men in leadership roles enjoy.
The individual barriers
Within leadership roles, women can face several individual barriers which may exist in response to the systemic barriers already faced.
Things like self-limiting beliefs, which often come about through internalising the same gender biases and stereotypes we’ve already discussed. Beliefs that stop women from even realising a leadership career is a possibility.
The flow-on effect of this is that, with fewer women in leadership roles, there aren’t as many roles models to look up to, to demonstrate that these pathways are possible.
Creating value through leadership programs
However you look at it, supporting women in leadership is arguably a good thing.
Yet programs focused on the individual rather than the system can fall short when they opt for short-sighted, surface-level changes with a deficit focus. Without a broader accountability strategy in place, and follow-on from those already in leadership, it can be seen as a token gesture (Johnson, Smith, and Christensen, 2023).
When framed correctly, programs that support women in leadership can be powerful. Rather than being undertaken in isolation, they need to create a connection to meaningful outcomes for women. To focus on strengths that aren’t solely within the realm of leadership but, when acted upon, create the platform for a leader to thrive.
