University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The leadership labyrinth: women's journey to chief future officer

(USC Thesis Other)

The leadership labyrinth: women's journey to chief future officer

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

The Leadership Labyrinth: Women’s Journey to Chief Future Officer
By
Nilufar Gamini

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

December 2023

© Copyright by Nilufar Gamini 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Nilufar Gamini certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Cathy Sloane Krop
Marcus Allen Pritchard
Patricia Elaine Tobey, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023
iv
Abstract
Women can gain access to C-suite roles, but it is not an entitlement. Despite representing over
half of the workforce, over 50% of management-level positions, and over 60% of advanced
degrees, women account for less than 15% of chief-level roles. Gender dominates leadership
studies, emphasizing obstacles and hurdles women face through their leadership journey. The
frameworks on gender disparity often use metaphors to explain factors preventing women’s
access to leadership roles. Through a promising practice methodology, this study uses the
leadership labyrinth framework by Carli and Eagly (2007) to analyze gender differences,
prejudice, and human capital factors hindering women’s access to C-suite roles. Employing a
qualitative research methodology to examine the experiences of 17 women in chief-level roles,
the findings from this study expose individual and organizational factors facilitating women’s
path to leadership. Women in C-suites must possess self-efficacy, self-promotion, a keen focus
on business impact, and they must adopt a learning mindset and take ownership of their career
development by seeking challenging work experiences and self-advocating for higher-level roles.
Additionally, gaining access to C-suites requires a robust network of connections to help mitigate
personal and professional challenges and obstacles. The findings propose that organizations
create a culture of inclusivity with deliberate commitment and accountability to gender inclusion
in leadership, with strategic goals and measurements to evaluate progress. The study advances a
reframed, modern-day leadership labyrinth where women become enablers and drivers of their
career journey where hard work, focus on impact, and compromising on work/life obligations
mitigate obstacles to career advancement into C-suite roles.
Keywords: accountability, bias, C-suite, capital, gender, labyrinth, leadership,
organization, prejudice, self-efficacy, self-promotion.
v
Dedication
To my daughter, Yasmin, and all the young women aspiring to lead, you can. Create your career
journey and bring your passion, drive, and infectious mindset to learn.
To my husband for believing in me, supporting me, and encouraging me to pursue my dreams.
To my son, Parsa, for being so supportive by giving me the time and space to prioritize being a
student over motherhood.
To my mom, for always inspiring and empowering me to learn and grow intellectually and
academically.
To my dad for instilling in me the confidence to never give up.
To my dear friend, Bita Daryabari, for her relentless encouragement and support of my doctoral
journey and for enabling other women to learn, grow, and lead continuously. You are a beacon
of inspiration and empowerment for other aspiring women leaders.
To my dear friend, Sasan Goodarzi, and all the men leaders for proactively and deliberately
elevating women in the workplace. Utilizing your leadership platform to influence and advocate
for enhancing women’s access to leadership roles is inspirational.
To my close friends whose love and support inspired me to check off my biggest bucket list and
realize learning is ageless.

vi
Acknowledgments
A doctoral labyrinth is a maze of challenges, obstacles, and blind spots with innumerable
and puzzling pathways. One can only navigate this doctoral journey with a network of alliances.
My sincere gratitude to my chair, Dr. Patricia Tobey, who provided unparalleled guidance,
experience, and expertise to help me successfully navigate this journey to the end. Her wisdom
and insights provided the necessary motivation and knowledge to overcome barriers along the
way. I appreciate Dr. Cathy Krop, who offered valuable insights and challenged me to think
beyond the expected. Her feedback prompted a creative lens to my study. I could not have
undertaken this journey without the unconditional and continuous support, feedback, and
encouragement of Dr. Marc Pritchard. I am beyond grateful for his unsurpassed dedication, time,
and expertise to help me mitigate the challenges of the dissertation process. This research would
not be possible without the amazing women who participated in my study. Their narratives were
the impetus for the creation of the Modern-Day Leadership Labyrinth. I am forever grateful to
have these women pave the path forward for other aspiring women leaders. To my OCL reading
groups and colleagues, your collective support and knowledge sharing scaffolded my learning.
My greatest support and cheerleaders were my husband, kids, and my parents. Without their
encouragement and help, I could not have been here today. I want to especially thank my
husband, who took on the extra burden of managing life and kids while I pursued my academic
dreams.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 3
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 3
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 4
Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 5
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 6
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .......................................................................................... 7
Background ......................................................................................................................... 7
Current Trends .................................................................................................................. 10
Metaphoric Frameworks ................................................................................................... 16
The Leadership Labyrinth ................................................................................................. 17
Gender Differences ........................................................................................................... 19
Prejudice ........................................................................................................................... 23
Human Capital .................................................................................................................. 29
Organization ...................................................................................................................... 34
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 35
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 39
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 42
viii
Sample and Population ..................................................................................................... 43
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 43
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 44
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 44
The Researcher .................................................................................................................. 45
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 46
Underlying Ethics ............................................................................................................. 47
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 48
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 50
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 51
Qualitative Findings Overview ......................................................................................... 53
RQ 1: Individual Factors ................................................................................................... 53
RQ2: Organizational Factors ............................................................................................ 61
RQ3: Mitigating Gender Disparity ................................................................................... 68
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 71
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 73
Modern Day Labyrinth ..................................................................................................... 75
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 78
RQ1: Individual Factors: Facilitating Women’s Path to C-suite ...................................... 80
RQ2: Organizational Factors: Facilitating Women’s Path to C-Suite .............................. 84
RQ3: Mitigating Gender Disparity in C-Suite .................................................................. 88
Implementation ................................................................................................................. 90
Burke-Litwin Change Model ............................................................................................ 91
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 96
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 96
ix
References ................................................................................................................................... 100
Appendix A: Recruitment Email ................................................................................................ 126
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 127
Appendix C: Informed Consent .................................................................................................. 130
Appendix D: A Priori Coding Table ........................................................................................... 131

x
List of Tables
Table 1: Women in the Workforce (United States and Canada) ............................................... 28
Table 2: Participant Demographics ........................................................................................... 51
Table 3: Table of Recommendations ......................................................................................... 79
Table 4: Table of Recommendations ......................................................................................... 93
Table B1: Interview Protocol ..................................................................................................... 128

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................... 36
Figure 2: Modern Leadership Labyrinth .................................................................................... 77
Figure 3: Burke-Litwin Change Model ...................................................................................... 92

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
True equality in positions of power requires a balanced representation and equal
opportunity for men and women. There is a growing awareness of the influence of gender parity
in leadership on enhanced organizational performance. Decades of studies link the presence of
women on the senior leadership platform to shareholder value, exceptional organizational
performance, and enhanced culture of collaboration, yet there continues to be an
underrepresentation of women in C-suite roles (Annis & Richard, 2017; Chakroun et al., 2018;
Hoobler et al., 2018; Liu & Tate, 2015). Although women have advanced into senior leadership
roles, their progress is slow and hindered by a lack of a clear roadmap and an incongruency of
gender and leadership roles (Branam et al., 2012; Carli & Eagly, 2007; Fine et al., 2020; Triana
& Yang, 2019). The number of women in the workforce has yet to translate into their
advancement into top-tier leadership roles (Carli & Eagly, 2007).
The scarcity of women in C-suite leadership roles is undeniable. According to Catalyst
report (2022), women hold over 50% of all professional and management roles but only account
for 9% of the CEOs. Few studies have examined women’s experiences who have overcome
challenges in reaching elite leadership positions (Callan et al., 2014). Women can attain C-suite
roles, but it requires identifying and addressing inherent obstacles impeding their advancement
(Chakroun et al., 2018; Hoobler et al., 2018). Without effectively dealing with the challenges
cultivating gender disparity, women forsake their pursuit of top leadership positions (Carli &
Eagly, 2007).
For women, leadership is no longer a destination but a journey. However, women of
color have not participated proportionately in the leadership journey. Although there is a
proliferation of research on gender and leadership, the primary focus is on White women (Fuller
2

et al., 2018). The intersection of gender and race poses a higher bias against women pursuing
senior leadership roles. According to Catalyst (2023), women of color represent only 5% of C-
suite positions versus 20% for White women. Contemporary organizations can benefit from the
transformational leadership skills of all women; therefore, understanding the reasons for the
dearth of women at C-suite levels is essential for addressing the leadership gap (McDonagh &
Paris, 2012). Despite challenges and limitations, failure to create a path to gender-diverse
leadership teams will harm an organization’s productivity, innovation, competitiveness, and
financial success (Jay & Morgan, 2016).
Background of the Problem
Almost 60 years since the passing of the Title VII Act, 33 years since the glass ceiling
elucidation, and multiple movements attempting to foster gender equality in society and
organizations, yet men continue to dominate the leadership landscape despite women occupying
more than half of the workforce (Clark & Dhatt, 2022; Prieto & Phipps, 2021). Workforce
diversity has not translated into gender inclusivity in leadership. Past research identified inimical
corporate cultures, gender role expectations, bias, lack of self-efficacy, and work/life balance as
obstacles to gender parity in leadership roles; however, there is still a lack of a clear roadmap to
gender parity in leadership (Branam et al., 2012; Carli & Eagly, 2016). The intersecting
identifies of gender and race in leadership research ignore the experiences and challenges of
women of color (Bond et al., 2021; Fuller et al., 2018). Research suggests a failure to open the
door for more access and inclusion of all women in higher leadership roles will hinder an
organization's ability to thrive in the multifaced global environment and become proactive in
preparing for complex challenges facing leaders (Chance, 2022; Hoobler et al., 2018).
3

Statement of the Problem
Men dominate the senior leadership platform. Although women make up more than half
of the population, progressively achieve higher education levels than men, and gain a more
significant presence in the workforce, they still cannot proliferate into elite leadership roles at an
equal pace as men (Burke et al., 2017). According to Catalyst (2022), a prominent nonprofit firm
conducting research geared toward women’s advancement via inclusion in the workplace, based
on the Fortune 500 companies list, women earned more bachelor's degrees (60%), more master's
degrees (60%), and more doctorate degrees (55%) than men since 2006. The same report stated
that in 2021, women represented 56% of the United States population and nearly 55% of
professional-level occupations. In 2021, the proportion of women in C-Suite roles was 24%,
senior vice presidents at 27%, and vice presidents at 30% (Catalyst, Women in Management,
2022). Fortune 500 companies have more than 10 times as many companies with men as CEOs
than women. Although the rhetoric about progress toward equality, gender parity in elite
leadership roles remains problematic (Bertrand, 2018; Callan et al., 2014; Grotto & Lyness,
2018).
Purpose of the Study
This study explored the narratives of women who have successfully navigated the
leadership labyrinth and overcome the challenges of gaining access to C-suite roles. Bierema
(2016) and Lipton (2017) note the scarcity of research on women’s experiences throughout the
path to leadership. Women can achieve elite leadership roles by negotiating and navigating their
way by addressing factors around human capital, gender differences, and prejudices appearing
along the way (Carli & Eagly, 2016). By effectively understanding the causes of discriminatory
impediments women encounter, the path to the center of the leadership labyrinth became
4

conceivable. Using a promising practice methodology combined with Carli and Eagly’s (2007)
leadership labyrinth framework, the research focused on the following questions:
1. What individual factors facilitated women’s path to C-suite roles?
2. What organizational factors facilitated women’s path to C-suite roles?
3. What is the current state of the leadership labyrinth for mitigating the challenges for
women pursuing C-suite roles?
Significance of the Study
Women are ready to become leaders but need the opportunity, the roadmap of the
potential impediments, and guidelines on navigating their way to elite leadership roles.
Investigating and addressing ways men and women can have equal access to leadership
continues to be problematic (Callan, 2014; Ryan, 2023). A Google search reveals more than
496,000,000 articles, references, and data points hinting at a proliferation of evidence where the
intersection of gender and leadership commands attention. Although there are decades of
research on impelling change in gender equality and leadership effectiveness, women remain
underrepresented in elite leadership roles (Burke et al., 2017). According to research on Fortune
500 companies in the United States, women only hold 20% of corporate board seats, 6% of CEO
positions, and 23% of senior executive titles (Saba, 2017). The same author suggested forecast
for any meaningful progress toward gender parity in leadership is bleak at best.
Decades of research has pointed to stereotyping, bias, discrimination, and pipeline
problem as primary contributors to gender disparity in leadership (Burke et al., 2017). The same
study suggests women's attributes are the basis for their selection into leadership roles in crisis or
high-risk-of-failure situations versus men's selection for their agentic characteristics to positions
in succeeding organizations. Although women face higher-risk roles, biases, and social role
5

incongruency, some have successfully attained senior leadership positions (Grotto & Lyness,
2018). Given the male-dominated leadership platform is likely to remain the same, women in
once impenetrable leadership positions can shed light on the journey ahead.
Accelerating the shift in the leadership landscape starts with highlighting the advantages
of women in leadership roles (Carli & Eagly, 2016). This study departs from historical research
on gender inequality by systematically analyzing leadership as it pertains to women and their
experiences, challenges, and triumphs in reaching elite leadership roles. Although identifying
and recognizing challenges women face along the path to leadership is essential, how some
women have successfully navigated their way to leadership and their impact on organizational
performance are crucial to enabling inclusive gender practices (Carli & Eagly, 2016; Grotto &
Lyness, 2018; Phipps & Prieto, 2021). Efforts to only identify exclusionary practices hindering
women's career advancement without analyzing ways the inclusion of women could yield
organizational success will continue to keep the focus on the problem rather than the solution
(Phipps & Prieto, 2021).
Definition of Terms
The following definitions provide clarity for their use throughout this study.
• Gender parity measures an equal ratio of men and women (Smith, 2022).
• Leadership labyrinth is a metaphor developed by Carly and Eagly (2007) to describe
the maze women must navigate to ascend to leadership positions.
• The glass ceiling refers to a metaphor first appearing in a Wall Street Journal article
by Hymowitz and Schellhardt (1986) describing an unofficial, invisible, and
impenetrable barrier to the professional advancement of women.
6

Organization of the Study
This dissertation follows a traditional five-chapter model. Chapter One provides an
introduction, purpose, significance, and an outline of the study. Chapter Two highlights the
background of the problem, current trends, relevant literature, and the conceptual framework.
Chapter Three details the research methodology, including sample population, data collection,
instrumentation, underlying ethics, limitations and delimitations, and the researcher. Chapter
Four examines and analyzes the qualitative findings from the interviews organized around the
three research questions, briefly describing each participant and their narratives on navigating
into C-suite roles. Chapter Five offers proposed recommendations for practice, a change
management implementation strategy, and areas for future research.

7

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Despite women’s historical progress, the gender gap in senior leadership continues into
the 21
st
century. Organizations with gender parity in elite leadership roles increased
organizational performance, fiscal outcomes, and employee engagement (Clark & Dhatt, 2022;
Phipps & Prieto, 2021). Few studies have explained why some women can successfully reach
elite leadership positions while many cannot. Carli and Eagly (2007) have used the metaphor of a
labyrinth to describe the path women must navigate to advance into leadership positions. The
same study suggested the glass ceiling is no longer relevant because some women have broken
the barriers and achieved high-level positions. Examining the journey of women who have
overcome the arduous task of advancing their careers can pave the path for gender parity in
leadership.
Despite challenges and hurdles, the journey to the executive suite has become more
attainable for some women. The circuitous paths of the leadership labyrinth are numerous and
complex, requiring women to negotiate and understand the roadmap of what lies ahead (Carli &
Eagly, 2016). Identifying obstacles women have faced along their leadership journey can guide
the next generation of women leaders with a viable path to the labyrinth’s center. The different
paths of the leadership labyrinth illuminated the opportunities women faced on their leadership
journey. Although women have been noticeably absent in C-suite roles, the presence of some
women in these roles suggested the once impenetrable barrier of a glass ceiling has shifted.
Background
Women have struggled to obtain true gender equality in the workplace even after gaining
the right to vote and equal representation under the law. Although women-led movements
advocating for women’s rights began in the 18
th
century, gender inequality has continued to
8

exclude women from equal access to opportunities (Blount & Tallerico, 2004; Quffa, 2016).
Several fundamental women-led social and political movements focused on advancing gender
equality and women’s rights. The Suffrage Movement was the first wave of the feminist
movement in 1848 when 300 women organized the first convention in New York to discuss how
they wanted women treated as individuals with equal rights and opportunities (Johnson, 2022).
The outcome was a document modeled after the Declaration of Independence, signed by 100
people with 12 resolutions supporting women’s rights. These resolutions, which became the
guiding tenets of the women’s suffrage movement, included the right to vote in 1920 (Blount &
Tallerico, 2004).
During the 1960s and 1970s, the second wave of the feminist movement advocated for
basic civic, social, and economic rights (Newman, 2011). The enactment of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 prohibited workplace sex discrimination and sparked a social movement,
changing the language for women's rights at work (Turk, 2016). Title VII transformed feminist
efforts to demand gender equality and leveraged the legal system to seek jobs typically held by
men (Turk, 2016). Although the application and monitoring of Title VII were inconsistent, it
sparked a social movement to define and propel gender equality. During the 1970s, barriers for
women changed from exclusion to management positions to exclusions at higher-level leadership
roles (Carli & Eagly, 2007).
The roadblocks women faced on their path to leadership shifted the theory behind of
scarcity of women in senior leadership roles. Although there was a rapid increase in the
participation of women in the workforce and subsequently in mid-manger positions through the
1990s, women remained strikingly underrepresented in elite leadership positions (Bertrand,
2018). In 1986, journalists Carol Hymowitz and Timothy Schellhardt from the Wall Street
9

Journal underscored the barrier blocking women’s rise to elite leadership roles (Carli & Eagly,
2007). Their observation was the premise behind constructing the “glass ceiling” concept as a
measure of inequity and an invisible barrier to women’s career advancement.
As a result of extensive research documenting the glass ceiling phenomenon in the early
1990s, the U.S. Department of Labor introduced its glass ceiling initiative in 1991 to explore and
gather data at the management level in the private sector on historically underrepresented groups
(Jackson et al., 2014). Research by the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission revealed that although
women had gained considerable representation in the workforce resulting from the introduction
of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, there remained many obstacles in removing the barrier
hindering gender parity in leadership (Jackson et al., 2014). Feminist activism propelled multiple
other significant and influential movements in the 19
th
and 20
th
centuries in highlighting the
problem of gender inequality.
The feminist movements that began in the 1960s and 1970s sought to address sexual
harassment, reproductive rights, and gender discrimination (Clark & Dhatt, 2022). The Black
Lives Matter movement began in 2013. It focused on ending police brutality and racial
inequality, led by many women who leveraged protest and activism to drive social power around
feminist movements (Nwakanma, 2022). The #MeToo movement began in 2017 and centered on
raising awareness of sexual harassment and assault and promoting accountability for
perpetrators. Boyle (2019) noted how storytelling by women in the #MeToo movement created a
feminist network through social media. The Times Up movement began in 2018 and focused on
ending sexual harassment and promoting gender equality in the workplace (Clark & Dhatt,
2022). There is also a global women’s rights movement currently underway in Iran, where
women-led protests fuel international solidarity against the oppression of women at work and in
10

society (Clark & Dhatt, 2022). Despite movements and efforts to propel participation and
inclusion of women in leadership roles, half of the workplace still grapples with inclusion and
equality on their path to leadership.
Current Trends
Despite decades into the gender inequality era with feminist activism and movements, the
road to C-suite parity continues to be challenging. Although policy and regulations have
influenced the extent and type of social justice for women, feminist movements have perpetuated
the hierarchies of gender inequality and the pursuit of justice (Ahmed, 2017; Weatherall, 2020).
Current trends on gender and leadership focus on the collective move toward equality, fairness,
and advocacy for social construction change (Berger & Radeloff, 2021). Few initiatives rooted in
activism for gender equality exposed the power imbalance between men and women in society
and organizations. The #MeToo and Iran’s women, life, and freedom movements have mobilized
digital footprint activism. The impact of COVID-19 and the significant resignations which
followed influenced women’s presence on the leadership platform. The use of digital footprint
has become a prevalent mechanism where women have created a collective voice in exposing
gender inequality as a social justice issue (Boomgaarden et al., 2022; Fernandez-Romero et al.,
2022; Pullen & Vachani, 2018).
The 21
st
century has brought an emergence of feminist online social movements toward
resistance against systemic and institutionalized sexism. Weatherall (2020) explained how
collective commitment to feminist principles of gender equality could help organizations
dismantle sexism. Through online collective efforts, women can navigate the maze of social
justice and political issues necessary to drive lasting change. Social media has become an
essential platform for organizing social action for justice (Rodrigues & Storer, 2020). The same
11

authors suggested the hashtag campaigns have created a far-reaching call for advocacy geared
toward the contemporary experiences of women. Examining the use of technology in building a
force for social change can mitigate gender inequality issues.
#MeToo Movement
Although based on allegations of sexual harassment and violence against women,
#MeToo became a widespread contemporary feminist movement toward gender equality
(Boomgaarden et al., 2022; Cook & Luo, 2022; Fernandez-Romero et al., 2022). In 2017, after
allegations of sexual harassment by Ashley Judd against Harvey Weinstein, Alyssa Milano
began the hashtag #MeToo on Twitter and encouraged people to share their stories to show the
magnitude of the problem. Shortly after, #MeToo became a pervasive social movement focused
on exposing sexual harassment and gender bias. Boomgaarden et al. (2022) argued how the
#MeToo movement created a collective communication channel among women, revealing the
power imbalance and gender inequality. Simultaneously, #MeToo moved beyond ending sexual
violence and became a social justice campaign focused on power dynamics related to race,
gender, class, and sexuality (Fileborn & Loney-Howes, 2019). The same authors showed beyond
North America, the MeToo hashtag circulated in 85 countries, including South Korea, Japan,
Indonesia, and Palestine.
The collaborative nature of storytelling of women in the #MeToo movement created a
digital means of documenting and speaking out about their experiences of gender inequality and
the imbalance of men in power. Gill and Orgad (2018) implied the #MeToo movement
unmasked deeper issues of inequality in pay, career advancement, and gender discrimination.
The same authors suggested #MeToo utilized social media to intensify the prevailing feminist
and social movements towards inherent gender and power. The global digital campaign quickly
12

developed a call for action to support a public debate and policy change around sexual
harassment and gender inequality practices (Gil & Orgad, 2018; Loney-Howes & Fileborn,
2019). Although the #MeToo movement prompted a vast network of activism rooted in raising
awareness and a call for action, other recent feminist movements have drawn global attention to
the problem of gender inequality.
Women, Life, Freedom Movement in Iran
Global oppositional and feminist movements have cultivated a continued focus on gender
oppression and power imbalance, impacting gender politics and policy change. Shaped by
repression and oppression of women, the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) has enforced compulsory
hijab for women in all public domains for the past 40 years. Starting in 1997, multiple attempts
at social and political reforms were unsuccessful against the conservative forces in IRI (Rouhi,
2022). The IRI used repeated patterns of brutal attacks, imprisonment, torture, and murder to
suppress public demonstrations (Beidollahkhani, 2022; Rouhi, 2022). The undercurrent
economic and social tensions were at the forefront of the June 2021 elections in Iran, where the
IRI deliberately controlled the election process, compounding anger and frustration among the
people in Iran. On September 16, 2022, Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old woman from Iran’s
Kurdistan region, died in the custody of the IRI brutality police after her arrest for improperly
wearing the hijab. Her death ignited a massive wave of protests across Iran. The #MahsaAmini
swiftly became the face of gender oppression and power imbalance in Iran (Rouhi, 2022).
Confronted by brutal government forces, protestors, led by brave Iranian women,
demanded and chanted “woman, life, freedom” while they cut their hair to symbolize solidarity
(Afary & Anderson, 2022, p. 86). Although Iranian women have protested for political and social
freedom and change, the women, life, freedom crusade emerged as a feminist movement and
13

resonated with other women worldwide (Choi et al., 2022; Pourmokhtari, 2022). The fight for
gender equality and freedom of choice in Iran created a global political power geared towards
exposing the oppression of women in society and at work. As a strategy of defiance, women in
Iran began to take off their veils in solidarity with Mahsa Amini, risking jail or death (Rouhi,
2022). Public spaces became the site of social and political contention in Iran, often streamed
online for the world to see: the first-ever feminist-led revolution for gender equality and freedom
(Pourmokhtari, 2022).
Feminist solidarity movements focused on social and gender issues can be a powerful
force for change (Amin, 2020; Chatzidakis & Kouki, 2020; Grosser & McCarthy, 2019). The
women, life, freedom movement emerged as cyber-feminist activism. Iranian women took to
online social media to share and magnify their voices for social change toward gender equality
(Beidollahkhani, 2022; Rahbari, 2021). Due to the crackdown of protesters in the streets by the
regime’s security forces, social media, especially Twitter, became a prevalent form of
storytelling by women to expose oppression and power (Beidollahkhani, 2022). Erhard et al.
(2020) noted how Twitter had become the descriptor of contemporary protest to form a narrative
sharing of information and experiences. Encouraged by the historical women’s quest for
freedom, the protest in Iran inspired women’s rights activists worldwide. Researchers have found
solidarity among women provided a fertile ground for the cultivation of social change
movements and the transformation of gender issues and injustice (Chatzidakis & Kouki, 2020).
COVID-19
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a sporadic disruption to the modern workplace and
became regressive for gender equality. Although the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was
organizational-wide, research revealed it disproportionally affected women (Matulevicius et al.,
14

2021; Power, 2020; Purcell et al., 2022; Thorbecke, 2020; Vasel, 2020). Women held almost half
of the jobs in the United States across all sectors in March 2020; however, more than half of the
first wave of job losses due to COVID-19 were jobs women held (Carli, 2020; Tran & Tuzemen,
2020). The unemployment rate became noticeably higher for women than men (International
Labor Organization, 2020). The National Women’s Law Center (2020), a center experienced in
tackling critical challenges facing women, reported between February and April (2020), women
lost 12.2 million jobs, reversing decades of job gains. The loss of jobs further obscured career
advancement for women (Carli, 2020). Alon et al. (2022) noted the strike difference between the
COVID-19 recession and pre-pandemic recessions was the adverse impact on women’s
employment, notably working mothers.
The COVID-19 pandemic had a regressive effect on gender parity in leadership. The
pandemic erased years of gains for gender equality in the workplace, aggregated by gender
differences in childcare responsibilities and occupation. During the COVID-19 pandemic,
working mothers’ employment declined compared to men and women without children (Adams-
Prassl et al., 2020; Alon et al., 2022; Bergin et al., 2020). School closures created a gender gap
among parents with school-age kids as mothers stayed home to take on childcare needs. In
addition, although both parents telecommuted during the pandemic, working mothers had a more
significant burden of childcare, especially with school-aged kids (Carli, 2020). Adams-Prassl et
al. (2020) noted the added care responsibilities of childcare posed a more significant job loss for
women.
The need for effective leadership amplifies during a crisis. During the COVID-19
pandemic, the gender imbalance among policymakers negatively impacted women. Carli (2020)
pointed to how the underrepresentation of women in decision-making positions resulted in
15

greater job loss, lack of career advancement, and women taking on more household work. The
lack of women in legislative leadership roles flagged existing gender inequalities and the failure
of policies to reflect women’s interests during the COVID-19 pandemic (Bergin et al., 2020). In
the United States, only two of the 27 White House COVID-19 task force staff were women.
Although women could not impact policy development, countries led by women showed
significantly higher results in speed of response rate, vaccination rate, and work continuity rate
due to the COVID-19 crisis, reflecting the positive impact of the non-male-dominated leadership
style (Blundell, 2020). The pandemic crisis heightened gender inequalities in unforeseen ways.
Disproportionate Impact on Women
The COVID-19 pandemic generated unprecedented work disruptions and exaggerated
gender inequities. Although the pandemic provided women a welcome opportunity to work from
home, they became disproportionally overburdened with domestic responsibilities and lagged in
career growth (Carli, 2020). Evidence showed the pandemic impacted women’s careers more
than men’s careers. There was a 24% increased rate of job loss for women than men during the
pandemic (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020). Job losses translated into slowing or hindering
advancement opportunities for women (Cajner et al., 2020; Dang & Nguyen, 2021). Working
from home also disproportionately burdened women, perpetuating gender inequality. Anderson
et al. (2021) noted women who telecommuted spent less time on work-related tasks and more
time on their share of domestic and childcare responsibilities, hindering their career advancement
(Adjei et al., 2021; Carli, 2020). In a study on the impact of COVID-19 on women, 80% of the
respondents reported the pandemic negatively impacted their professional careers (Adjei et al.,
2021). The COVID-19 pandemic perpetuated gender inequality by hindering women’s
professional growth.
16

The Great Resignation
The COVID-19 crisis harmed women’s presence in the workforce. Women lost 12.2
million jobs between February and April 2020, which reversed all the job gains over the past
decade (The National Women’s Law Center, 2020). Although telecommuting was an option for
employees during the pandemic, Carli (2020) noted the predominance of essential healthcare
workers were women who could not work from home. School closures increased childcare
demands and forced many women to resign from their jobs to take care of their families (Bash &
Kesler, 2021; Landivar et al., 2020; Purcell et al., 2022). Benson and Oo (2021) suggested the
pandemic impacted business sectors with higher representation of women, such as education,
health services, hospitality, and leisure.
The already embedded social gender norms and expectations disproportionately burdened
women working to prioritize childcare responsibilities over careers (Alon et al., 2020; Odate &
Parmar, 2021). The same article showed by the end of 2021, the pandemic had shed 3.7 million
women from the workforce, many of whom have not returned to work. The COVID-19 crisis
reduced the rate of women in the labor force, further challenging their representation from the
pipeline to leadership.
Metaphoric Frameworks
Metaphors are part of storytelling to propel change. Qualitative researchers often find
themselves in a dichotomy of presenting evidenced-based research while capturing the
experiences, emotions, and narratives of equity and social justice (Denzin & Giardina, 2016;
Gwyther & Possamai-lnesedy, 2009; Morgan, 2007). Although traditional research often relied
on numbers and words to examine a phenomenon, they could not effectively explore the
complexities of social life in a study (Denzin & Giardina, 2016; Mann & Warr, 2017). In
17

conjunction with interviews, metaphoric frameworks have emerged as a non-verbal sensory
qualitative method of analyzing abstract research to provide contextual meaning and details
(Knutz & Presnall, 2012; Mann & Warr, 2017; Varga-Atkins & O’Brien, 2009). Non-verbal
frameworks are most effective in understanding the systemic forces, social constraints, and
economic burdens structuring women’s daily lives.
The outdated metaphor of a glass ceiling has often formulated the underrepresentation of
women in leadership. A metaphor for discouraging roadblocks and an unbreakable barrier, the
glass ceiling implies women were passive and powerless victims on their journey to leadership
(Carli & Eagly, 2007; Saleem et al., 2017). Although the glass ceiling metaphor helped expose
gender inequality in organizations, ineffective in capturing the complexities of gender issues,
evolving nature of leadership, and discrimination in modern organizations (Carli & Eagly, 2016;
Ritchie, 2017). Analyzing the scarcity of women in leadership in contemporary organizations
should include obstacles and challenges but also an encouraging and relatable framework where
women take charge of their career development versus falling victim to organizational
roadblocks, societal expectations, and prejudice (Carli & Eagly, 2016; McGowan & Stamper,
2022). Given some women have reached C-suite level roles, the leadership labyrinth has
emerged as a practical metaphor to visualize the barriers and challenges women faced as they
navigated the path to senior leadership roles.
The Leadership Labyrinth
Guiding this study is a challenging yet optimistic leadership labyrinth structure by Alice
H. Eagly and Linda Carli (2007), where a viable route to the center of the leadership labyrinth
was attainable but required awareness, persistence, and careful analysis of the puzzle ahead. The
walls around the leadership labyrinth reinforced organizational barriers, social role biases, and
18

women’s self-efficacy (DeFrank-Cole, 2019; Lucia & Padgett, 2021). Throughout organizational
entry, performance, and promotion, the labyrinth projected differences in career trajectories for
women versus men (Bart et al., 2019; Carli & Eagly, 2016; McDonagh & Paris, 2012). The
experiences of women who have navigated the leadership labyrinth promoted an opportunity for
other women on the path to leadership.
Women have faced discrimination, unequal career progression, and gaps in access to
human capital in organizations. The labyrinth metaphor articulated the obscurities of women’s
journey through their personal and professional life and a path forward to the center of leadership
(Carli & Eagly, 2007). Although complex and fear-provoking, the labyrinth offers a more
descriptive and circular landscape of the limitations and opportunities for gender parity in
leadership (Belasen, 2017; Carli & Eagly, 2016). The once impenetrable barriers to leadership
have become more porous as some women have reached top leadership roles. The labyrinth
framework recognized the evolved nature of leadership and offered a maze to a viable journey
where each opening contributed to women’s ability to find their path to leadership (Hancock &
Walker, 2018; McDonagh & Paris, 2012).
Strategies for enhancing gender parity in the leadership labyrinth had three main
elements: prejudice, human capital, and gender differences (Carli & Eagly, 2007). Prejudice
included the stereotypical preconceptions about gender roles, unconscious bias against women
leaders, cross-pressures of balancing gender roles and leadership traits, vulnerability to align
with gender stereotypes and reactance to defy them, and intersectionality of gender and race.
Human capital included differences in gender educational levels, work experience continuity,
access to development opportunities, and balancing work/life conflict. Gender differences
included style, effectiveness, and self-efficacy.
19

Gender Differences
The systemic pattern of gender differences aided in understanding how men and women
are innately distinct in how they lead. Research showed women made up more than half the
population in the United States, earned most post-secondary degrees, and held close to 55% of
professional and management roles (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2022) but faced significant
underrepresentation in C-suite roles (Catalyst, 2020). Although the research was inconclusive in
identifying specific skills contributing to leadership disparity, gender differences had manifested
more visibly in senior leadership roles where the dominant norms were masculine (Asparisi-
Torrijo & Ribes-Giner, 2022; Baba et al., 2017). One stark difference was how men had greater
confidence in pursuing senior leadership roles than women (Alan et al., 2020). The same author
argued men’s agentic attributes aligned with leadership’s stereotypical traits of power, drive, and
ambition, which cultivated their confidence to pursue higher-level leadership roles.
The gender gap in leadership assumed women were less suited to lead. Sheppard (2018)
argued women’s awareness of expected incongruency between leadership and women’s roles
created lower aspirations to lead. Eagly and Wood (2013) showed how women internalized
societal expectations of gender roles, superseding their desire to pursue higher leadership
positions. Balushkina et al. (2022) suggested insufficient and ineffective organizational systems
and culture in facilitating women’s leadership development, attributed to women’s lack of
ambition to aspire to leadership roles. Understanding how gender impacts leadership aided in
determining expectations of the effectiveness of women in organizations. Research has shown
how the gender gap in leadership has impacted gender style and effectiveness, commitment and
motivation, and self-efficacy (Carli & Eagly, 2007; Eagly & Wood, 2013; Hewlett et al., 2018;
Northouse, 2022).
20

Style and Effectiveness
The intersection of gender and leadership has been the interest of scholars for decades
(Begum et al., 2018; Eagly et al., 2013; Eagly & Kara, 2002; Kaiser & Wallace, 2016). The
dominance of men on the leadership platform has defined leadership practices and societal
expectations. Men were 10 times more represented in C-suite roles than women (Catalyst, 2022).
One rationalization for this leadership gender gap has been the difference in gender style and
effectiveness. Although men and women are innately different, the debate on whether sex
differences impacted leadership was inconclusive (Bandura et al., 2018; Eagly & Wood, 2013).
The primary source of contention was the nature versus nature impact on gender effectiveness.
Feminists’ movements significantly impacted the construct of gender theories with the notion of
women’s behaviors being derivative of embedded societal expectations and not a biological
aspect of gender (Eagly et al., 2012). The feminist argued for the separation of sex as a biological
influence from gender as a sociocultural influence (Eagly & Wood, 2013).
The lack of evidence linking gender to leadership effectiveness has shifted the focus to
gender behavior patterns. Braun et al. (2018) noted leadership styles reduce the perception of
leadership effectiveness only to influence followers in the organization. Bandura (2018) argued
further on how gender has emerged as a form of leadership style preference, rather than a barrier,
in contemporary organizations. The explanatory lens of the leadership labyrinth directed
attention toward gender style as a function of workplace preference and experience to influence
the workforce (Balcom, 2023; Bandura et al., 2018). Research suggested transformational
leadership emerged as a popular leadership style in modern organizations, perceived to promote
diversity and innovation (Brandt & Edinger, 2015; Braun et al., 2018).
21

When gender was a factor of perceived effectiveness, women better aligned with
transformational leadership style. Northouse (2022) pointed out how women tend to lead in a
participative and people-oriented style, focused on social values, which was more aligned with
transformational leader behaviors. Brandt and Edinger (2015) indicated how transformational
leadership connects to leader effectiveness, promoting higher productivity, engagement, job
satisfaction, and lower turnover. Although women’s transformational style enhanced
organizational performance, employee collaboration, and social impact, masculine traits continue
to define a model of leadership (Debebe, 2019; Balushkina et al., 2022). The negative judgments
about women’s leadership style influenced their self-efficacy.
Self-Efficacy
Equal representation of voices and ideas is compulsory for businesses to succeed.
Another area of gender difference was self-confidence and the ability to speak up about work-
related issues and self-promotion. Self-efficacy has emerged as a potentially important factor in
the lack of women in higher leadership positions (Bandura et al., 2018). Self-efficacy has
become a vital attribute of a leader, defined as the motivation, abilities, knowledge, and skills a
leader needs to lead others (Bandura, 2007). Women’s self-efficacy aligned with positive
individual, team, and organizational outcomes, including an increased presence on the leadership
platform (Eibl et al., 2020). Although women had a more significant workforce share, their
voices were less than men (Eibl et al., 2020). Organizations missed significant potential for
enhanced organizational performance by failing to advocate women’s voices, ideas, and
suggestions (Eibl et al., 2020).
Women’s lack of leadership self-efficacy hindered their ability to seek senior-level
leadership roles. Research on self-efficacy and leadership showed a stark difference in the level
22

of self-efficacy between men and women (Alvarez-Huerta et al., 2022; Fuller et al., 2018;
Redmond et al., 2017). Self-efficacy in leadership refers to the confidence to exert influence over
others (Gandolfi et al., 2017). Although women had high aspirations, they had much lower
confidence than men in ascending to senior leadership roles (DeFrank-Cole, 2019). The same
study suggested reinforcing women’s self-efficacy through praise and recognition helped close
the gender gap in leadership. A key factor was recognizing women’s decision-making and
judgment capability (Fuller et al., 2018). With enhanced self-efficacy, women could confront
career growth challenges and promote themselves more easily (Fuller et al., 2018; Newman et
al., 2019).
Linked closely to self-efficacy were gender differences in self-promotion. Although self-
promotion appeared necessary for career advancements, women were uncomfortable or took the
initiative to self-promote (Dooley et al., 2018). In addition to hard work and performance, the
ability to promote oneself was critical in gaining access to career growth opportunities (Marcus,
2015). DeFrank-Cole (2019) described self-promotion as the ability to proactively ask for
assignments and seek support regarding career development and job opportunities. Women
showed significantly less self-promotion of their work and capabilities than men, while men
sought opportunities for promotion and career development 75% more than women (Byars-
Winston et al., 2019). The same study showed women had 70% more doubt about accepting a
leadership role due to a lack of self-efficacy, fear of failure, and high stress. Women’s lack of
self-efficacy can shed light on the influence of gender preconceptions on the scarcity of women
in senior leadership roles.
23

Prejudice
Socially constructed perceptions of gender have continued to hinder women’s path to
senior leadership roles. Over the last 100 years, women won the right to vote, pursued higher
education degrees, entered the paid labor force, and gained access to leadership (Diehl &
Dzubinski, 2016). Despite the undisputed evidence of gender equality measures over the last
century, the underrepresentation of women in C-suite roles continued (Carli & Eagly, 2016). A
significant justification for gender disparity in leadership was stereotyping of men and women,
activated by perceived gender biases (Cenek, 2020; Northouse, 2022). Examining the implicit
generalizations about genders, cross-pressures of gender and leadership traits, vulnerability, and
reactance to stereotype behaviors, and intersectionality’s impact on leadership, explains the
leadership gap. Understanding gender stereotypes and their impact on the attitudes and behaviors
of others promotes measures to limit gender inequality practices at work.
Gender Stereotypes
There is a preference for leaders to be men. Although women have increasingly advanced
into male-dominated leadership roles, gender equality in leadership remained an exception rather
than a norm. Additionally, gender stereotypes are a significant barrier to women’s career
advancement (Bekk et al., 2018; Hentschel et al., 2019; Fischbach et al., 2015). Danby (2021)
defined gender stereotypes as generalized views about the traits and characteristics of a specific
group. The stereotype of women with communal traits of being caring, supportive, nurturing, and
emotionally sensitive, while men with agentic traits of being assertive, confident, independent,
and decisive (Eagly & Wood, 2012; Heilman, 2012;). The socially constructed perceptions about
gender traits manifested into disparities in leadership behaviors (Badura et al., 2018; Bekk et al.,
24

2018; Hentschel et al., 2019). The over-representation of men on the leadership platform
depicted leadership in masculine terms.
The socially gendered construct of stereotypic characteristics influenced assumptions
about leadership competencies. Eagly and Karau (2002) asserted women’s communal attributes
were incongruent with agentic leadership attributes. Hentschel et al. (2019) pointed out the
perception of women needing to be more assertive than men to be influential leaders due to
stereotypical communal characteristics. The same authors showed evidence of women who also
rated themselves with communal characteristics. The incongruency between women and
leadership characteristics was detrimental to gender parity in leadership. Evidence showed the
gender gap in leadership was not due to differences in gender style or effectiveness but instead to
the preconceived beliefs about individuals as leaders (Danby, 2021; Lanaj & Hollenbeck, 2015;
Heilman et al., 2019).
With the increased number of women in professional and managerial roles, the
conceptual models of leadership have shifted. Badura et al. (2018) explained although leadership
perceptions have slowly moved towards communal traits, gender role biases continue to impact
women. The over-representation of men in C-suite roles activated an implicit biased against
women in leadership rooted in stereotypical beliefs about agentic leadership traits (Badura et al.,
2018; Carli & Eagly, 2007; Northouse, 2022). Although past research focused on the apparent
forms of gender stereotypes, unconscious bias revealed a more pervasive barrier to women’s
career aspirations (Andrade & Madsen, 2018).
Unconscious Bias
Effective leadership has an invisible masculine prerequisite. Although research showed
the impact of women leaders on positive organizational results and employee engagement,
25

preconceptions about women in leadership continued to limit their path to career advancement
(Andrade & Madsen, 2018; Lyness & Grotto, 2018; Ryan, 2023). Kaiser and Wallace (2016)
argued masculine characteristics defined leadership traits and created an unconscious bias
against women leaders. Unconscious gender bias, or implicit bias, occurs when people make
judgments based on gender stereotypes without awareness.
Women faced organizational and societal resistance as they ascended to leadership roles.
Unconscious biased toward women in domestic roles and men in positions of power created the
societal perceptions of the division of labor (Heilman et al., 2019). The same authors claimed
less favorable attitudes toward women in leadership influenced women’s competence and
effectiveness as they navigated their way to leadership roles. Mella (2022) suggested the basis
for mental leadership models was societal gender role expectations. The unconsciously biased
leadership models translated into implicit gender bias in organizational culture, decisions, and
policies which cultivated gender inequality in leadership (Mella, 2022). The leadership models
created a dichotomy of women expected to display agentic traits as leaders while aligned with
their inherent communal characteristics (Northouse, 2022).
Cross Pressures
The conflicting gendered and leadership behavior expectations limited the perception of
women as leaders. Although there were changes in the workforce distribution, the increased
presence of women in organizations did not effectively alter the pervasive masculine-centric
preconceptions about leadership (Bekk et al., 2018; Bullough et al., 2022). Based on implicit
gender beliefs, women confronted the cross-pressures of adapting an agentic leadership model
without the threat of gender stereotypes of communal traits. Kubu (2018) discussed how women
faced negative consequences when they behaved in ways inconsistent with their gender norms.
26

The same author implied agentic leadership behaviors rewarded men but penalized women. The
incongruency with gender stereotype expectations, undervalued and disadvantaged women
leaders.
The irreconcilable demands women faced in leadership created a double bind. Although
the transformational style of women leaders aligned with the needs of contemporary
organizations, deeply embedded gender stereotypes deterred women from displaying behaviors
consistent with their gender style of leadership (Bullough et al., 2022). Grounded on social
gender role norms, organizational work systems, and cultures reinforced agentic behaviors from
leaders, which disadvantaged women (Eagly & Wood, 2016; Hechavarria & Ingram, 2019).
Bullough et al. (2022) showed women who did not conform to expected leadership norms
violated gender norms with adverse reactions from others. Northouse (2022) noted how
prejudiced gender expectations prompted negative evaluations of women’s leadership
effectiveness. The competing demands of social norms and leadership role expectations created a
complex path to leadership for women.
Vulnerability and Reactance
Confronted with social norm expectations and gender role biases, women either showed
vulnerability and assimilated into the gender role stereotype or showed reactance and acted in
counter-stereotypical behaviors (Javadian & Zoogah, 2014; Northouse, 2022; Simon & Hoyt,
2013). An examination of reactance showed some women adopted masculine leadership
characteristics to blend with leadership role expectations but encountered negative social
backlash (Javadian & Zoogah, 2014). Although counter-stereotypical behavior enhanced
women’s performance, adopting masculine characteristics in leadership violated social gender
norms and penalized women (Hoyt & Murphy, 2016). Reactance was also how women leaders
27

opposed gender stereotypes where capabilities did not align with preconceived gender norms.
The same authors argued women with high self-efficacy were more likely to react to harmful
gender stereotypes with reactance.
Vulnerability to negative gender stereotypes impacted women in leadership. Not realizing
it was unfair, women who confirmed the harmful gender stereotype, known as stereotype threat,
showed vulnerability (Arnold et al., 2022; Kalokerinos et al., 2014). Women were susceptible to
stereotype threat when they adapted to the stereotypical gender expectations of how leadership
required masculine traits. The incongruency of gender norms and leadership traits created
unfavorable stereotype vulnerability for women, harmed women’s leadership aspirations, and
reduced performance (Arnold et al., 2022; Kalokerinos et al., 2017). Women who were
vulnerable to gender stereotypes and lacked the confidence to pursue leadership roles
exacerbated the scarcity of women in C-suite positions. The research found the presence of more
than one stereotype, such as race and gender, activated an adverse reaction (Javadian & Zoogah,
2014).
Intersectionality
A greater divergent to gender inequality in leadership is the intersection of gender and
race. Although historically, feminist movements and regulations have made an impact on
increasing the number of women in the workforce and the leading platform, women of color
lagged more than White women in senior leadership roles (Collins, 2015; Le, 2021).
Traditionally the representation of group identity has focused on gender or race, but scholars
have pulled on the intersectionality lens to examine the crossing of different identities (Bejarano
et al., 2022; Bond et al., 2021). In 1989 Kimberle Crenshaw, a Black legal scholar, developed an
intersectionality framework to examine how social identities such as gender, race, ethnicity, and
28

social class overlapped with one another and with systems of power to form exclusion and
marginalization (Crenshaw, 1991). Crenshaw focused on Black women’s disadvantages in the
legal system. Intersectionality was a vital lens to analyze critical social problems in
organizations, employment, education, and health (Collins, 2019).
The underrepresentation of women in C-suites is a problem, but a more significant
disparity in leadership is for women of color (Table 1). According to the Catalyst report (2023),
White women identified as a collectively disadvantaged group to better cope with discrimination
and prejudice (Greene et al., 2021). The same authors argued lack of women of color in feminist
and legislative efforts created less empathy and inclusion for them in society and the workforce.
Bejarano et al. (2019) noted the perception of equal representation was highest when gender and
race intersected as sub-identities of a collective group. Fuller et al. (2018) argued despite their
experiences, education, and self-efficacy, Black women leaders faced racial and gendered
stereotypes.

Table 1
Women in the Workforce (United States and Canada)
Position All women Women of color
C-suite 24% 4%
Senior vice President 27% 5%
Vice president 30% 7%
Senior manager/director 35% 9%
Manager 41% 12%
Entry level 48% 17%

29

Although more women have penetrated the C-suite level roles over the past decades,
biases and stereotypes have made it more challenging for women of color to navigate the
leadership labyrinth. Women’s professional and personal challenges through their career journey
posed another explanation for gender disparity in leadership.
Human Capital
The labyrinth offered gender differences in creating human capital, including education,
work experience, work/home balance, and development opportunities, as explanations for gender
disparity in leadership (Carli & Eagly, 2007; McGowan & Stamper, 2022). Despite women’s
advancements in education and experience, the stereotype of women as nurturers versus strong
leaders created biased judgments about women’s leadership effectiveness and performance.
Racial and gender biases around human capital were more detrimental to the career growth of
women of color than White women (McGowan & Stamper, 2022). Northouse (2022) argued
some women had less work experience due to childcare and domestic responsibilities while
others took on work and family responsibilities. Lucia and Padgett (2021) showed as women
progressed through their careers, they had less access to developmental opportunities due to
gender stereotypes and a lack of social capital. From an educational perspective, women have
surpassed men in professional degrees (Catalyst, 2023). Women needed higher educational
accomplishments than men for career growth (Bussemakers et al., 2017). Examining elements of
human capital and their impact on the scarcity of women in C-suite roles opens the pathway for
other aspiring women leaders.
Education
Women’s educational advancement has yet to translate to career advancement. The
human capital obtained through education was an explanation for gender differences in
30

leadership (Dilli & Westerhuis, 2018; Northouse, 2022). Although men have dominated the
leadership platform, women have made significant educational advancements. According to
Catalyst (Women in the U.S. Workforce, 2022), women earned 60% of bachelor’s, 60% of
master’s, and 55% of doctorate degrees. The same report showed women of color earned more
degrees than their men counterparts. Higher educational achievements appear more necessary for
women than men in competing for elite leadership roles (Bussemakers et al., 2017). From
diversity and inclusion perspectives, scholars have studied how human capital through education
explains gender differences and gender equality (Brush & Brush, 2006; Delmar & Davidson,
2000; Dilli & Westerhuis, 2018).
Human capital measures worked collectively to create an impact for women. Marques
(2017) suggested education alone cannot mitigate career advancement challenges for women as
the gender gap in leadership remained substantial, despite women’s higher educational
attainment. Although education alone was not a source of closing the gender gap, education led
to greater awareness in organizations and enhanced job opportunities for women in the
workforce (Gorska, 2023). However, Gronqvist and Lindqvist (2016) noted the impact of
education alone could not effectively influence the path to leadership. The same authors argued
for consideration of other elements of human capital beyond education for gendered leadership
outcomes. Greiff et al. (2019) suggested work experience in conjunction with education
increased the probability of gender equality in leadership.
Work Experience
Women face greater scrutiny about their qualifications and work experience than men
when pursuing leadership roles. Work experience has been a critical predictor of performance in
leadership. Although the selection process included assessing skills, knowledge, and education,
31

past work experience had more influence as a predictor of performance in senior leadership roles
(Bilimoria et al., 2018). The incongruency between leadership and gender roles disadvantaged
women in evaluating their work experience. Koch et al. (2015) posited that even with similar
work experiences, the leadership selection process favored men. Gender role preconceptions and
biases restrained women’s leadership aspirations despite their qualifications and work experience
(Beeri et al., 2015; Lehnert & Sanchez, 2019). Although women’s leadership effectiveness, style,
and experience align with contemporary organizations’ needs, social and cultural norms favor
men having less experience than women in C-suite roles (Adapa, 2017). Despite having the
necessary work experience, gender assumptions restrict women’s career growth.
Gender biases discouraged women with the necessary work experience from pursuing
senior leadership roles. Beeri et al. (2015) argued how masculine norms such as competitiveness,
independence, and assertiveness defined the qualifications for leadership. The negative role
stereotypes of leadership impacted women’s self-efficacy to develop their careers and gain
leadership experience (Lucia & Padgett, 2021). Although they had the necessary work
experience to be leaders, some women consciously chose not to aspire to C-suite roles due to
domestic and childcare priorities (Lehnert & Sanchez, 2019; Lucia & Padgett, 2021). Northouse
(2022) explained how the lack of continuity in work experience due to childcare was detrimental
to women’s career advancement. The same author added the disproportionate domestic and
family responsibilities, coupled with gender role stereotypes, posed a greater need for added
work experience from women than men. Gender stereotypes, lack of self-efficacy, and work/life
balance created obstacles for women to increase their human capital.
32

Work/Life Balance
Motherhood triggered stereotypes about women’s competence and commitment to lead.
The work/life balance negatively impacted women’s career trajectory (Carli & Eagly, 2007;
Deutsch & Yao, 2014; Alarcon et al., 2022). Working mothers face the scrutiny of lacking
commitment to the family when pursuing leadership roles. Although work and a family are
challenging for everyone in leadership roles, women often carry a greater burden of finding
balance (Lehnert & Sanchez, 2019). According to role incongruency theory (Eagly & Karau,
2002), the disparity between the behavioral norms expected from women and the role of a leader
created an unfavorable view of working mothers. Alarcon et al. (2022) argued working mothers
committed to family responsibilities more than their aspirations to grow into leadership roles.
The same authors showed the desire for women to balance work and family was incompatible
with gender norm expectations from society and organizations, which pushed women to either
opt out of working or take a step back.
Gender disparity in C-suite roles was partly a symptom of an implicit bias at societal and
organizational levels against working mothers. Deeply embedded in policies and organizational
culture, traditional stereotypes of gender roles discouraged women from pursuing senior
leadership positions (Alarcon et al., 2022; Coetzee & Moosa, 2020). Adame et al. (2016) showed
how men and women experienced different societal expectations where working mothers lacked
support from organizations and their managers for domestic and family responsibilities, which
hindered their ability to advance their careers. McMullan et al. (2018) noted a lack of social
support for women exacerbated work/life conflict. The same authors suggested at an
organizational level, a lack of strategies to promote work/life balance, such as telecommuting
33

and flexible working hours, constrained women’s ability to juggle their professional and family
obligations.
Organizations allocated limited time off for maternity leave, discouraging some women
from returning to work. For women who returned to work after maternity leave, career growth
opportunities did not provide the necessary flexibility to meet the demands of family life (Cohen
et al., 2018; Khalid & Sekiguchi, 2019). Highly gendered beliefs about women prioritizing
family over work and the lack of organizational support for working mothers expose gender
inequalities in career aspirations (Starr & Taoffoletti, 2016). Organizations also needed more
effective strategies for developmental opportunities to foster women to advance in their careers.
Development Opportunities
The overrepresentation of men in C-suite roles perpetuated men’s advantage in career
development opportunities. A report by McKinsey & Company (Women in the Workplace,
2022) showed men’s access to development opportunities provided greater chances for
promotion than women with similar backgrounds. The same report showed 40% of women felt
their work needed recognition and appreciation during performance reviews. Given the scarcity
of C-suite roles, leadership development opportunities were especially critical for women (Colby
& Salinas, 2021). Holmberg et al. (2016) noted how leaders faced expanded organizational
complexities which require skills development. Although leadership development was a
competitive advantage for organizations, women needed equal opportunities for formal
development in leadership skills (Burke et al., 2017).
Increasing development opportunities for women creates a more robust and equitable
leadership pipeline. Gender-inclusive development opportunities ensured women gained the
necessary leadership skills and knowledge for C-suite role consideration (Blaney, 2020).
34

Research suggested that simply increasing leadership development initiatives did not enhance
women’s career growth (Adler, 2015; Andrade & Madsen, 2018; Madsen, 2015). Blaney (2020)
argued increasing women’s representation in senior leadership platforms requires targeted
development interventions. Equitable development opportunities enhance women’s self-
confidence to pursue senior leadership roles (Andrade & Madsen, 2018; Blaney, 2020). Burton
& Weiner (2016) explained women’s participation in leadership development opportunities
shaped their confidence and motivation to aspire to C-suite roles. Although other factors
impacted gender disparity in leadership, societal gender norm expectations impacted leadership
development opportunities.
Gender biases and stereotypes became systemic and entrenched in organizational work
systems and culture. Biased assumptions about the superiority of masculine traits in leadership
disadvantaged women and hindered their access to development opportunities ("The Female
Fightback," 2021). Although organizations formally committed to gender-neutral development
practices, gender stereotypes implicitly created barriers to development opportunities for women
(Moore & Nash, 2021; Northouse, 2016). Colby & Salinas (2021) argued to limit gender biases,
development opportunities for women must be strategic and intentional, focused on leadership
skills development and workplace learning. Development opportunities created a leadership
pipeline for women aspiring to C-suite roles. Increasing education, work experience, and
development opportunities enhance women’s chances to advance to C-suite roles (Burke et al.,
2017; Moore & Nash, 2021).
Organization
Organizations play a critical role in cultivating gender equality in senior leadership roles.
Most research on gender disparity in leadership focused on identifying the problem and barriers
35

with limited recognition of organizational commitment and accountability in driving a gender-
inclusive leadership platform. Meaningful change must include an analysis of the organizational
environment factors necessary for women to advance into leadership roles (Boyle et al., 2022).
The same authors argued a systemic review of cultural elements promoting change is necessary
to drive interventions toward gender-inclusive leadership. Although most initiatives addressing
gender inequality focus on women as a source of the problem, impeding norms perpetuating
masculine forms of leadership requires accountability and commitment to creating a gender-
inclusive culture (Bekker et al., 2019). Understanding how women successfully navigated the
leadership labyrinth by overcoming organizational barriers can advance access for other aspiring
women leaders.
Conceptual Framework
This study examined the lived experiences of women who successfully navigated the
leadership labyrinth and reached C-suite roles across various industries. This study's conceptual
framework (Figure 1) draws from the leadership labyrinth by Carli and Eagly (2007). The
leadership labyrinth model explains women’s challenges and obstacles when navigating the
leadership maze. The labyrinth framework emphasized how the path to leadership is not linear
but circuitous, with many twists and turns. Although filled with complex and dynamic paths,
there was a viable path to the labyrinth’s center (Carli & Eagly, 2016). The walls around the
leadership labyrinth reinforced organizational barriers, social role biases, and women’s self-
efficacy (DeFrank-Cole, 2019; Lucia & Padgett, 2021). The labyrinth provided a framework for
empowering women to take charge of their careers and advance their leadership path.
Furthermore, the leadership labyrinth illuminates and explores the extra tribulations women of
color face in pursuing C-suite roles.
36

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

The leadership labyrinth presented three explanations for gender disparity in leadership:
human capital, gender differences, and prejudice (Carli & Eagly, 2007; McGowan & Stamper,
2022). First, lack of continuous work experience due to domestic and child-rearing
responsibilities impacted women’s career choices. Women also had fewer career and
37

professional development opportunities due to gender stereotypes (Northouse, 2022). Second,
society expected women to stay in roles congruent with their gender versus the musicalized
leadership roles (Carli & Eagly, 2016). The same study suggested women were less likely to
self-promote for leadership roles or ask for what they want in organizations. Third, pervasive
stereotypes of women that have communal characteristics were incompatible with the agentic
characteristic needed for leadership (Heilman, 2018).
Organizational structure is another impediment women face in the leadership labyrinth.
Examining gender and leadership through the lens of the labyrinth involves closely analyzing
organizational systems and beliefs (Eagly, 2012; McGowan & Samper, 2022; Barth et al., 2019).
Crisp et al. (2012) explained how workplace systems support leaders who align with the social
identity of the organization. Barth et al. (2019) suggested organizational structures and beliefs
enabled or hindered women’s access to the leadership labyrinth. The leadership labyrinth
examines the influence of organizational beliefs in establishing commitment and accountability
toward women in leadership.
Accountability
Organizational structures require accountability to drive gender-inclusive leadership.
Establishing systems of organizational accountability measurements for women’s progress into
senior leadership roles can enhance gender parity in C-suite roles (Elliott et al., 2022).
Diversity and gender-inclusive goals included organizational accountability mechanisms for
creating responsibility to propel change and a call to action (Adserias et al., 2017). Crone et al.
(2018) described accountability as holding leaders responsible and accountable to people in an
organization. The same authors showed how organizational accountability included a
commitment to set gender equality goals, action steps, and regular monitoring for progress.
38

Elliott et al. (2022) argued sustainable change toward a gender-inclusive culture required leaders
to be accountable for progress toward gender equality measures. A culture of gender equality
translated into a commitment to equal opportunities for women to develop, advance, and lead.
Accountability took on different forms, including legislative, social, and ethical.
Although leader effectiveness measures monetary value to the stakeholders, societal inequities
have prompted a need for ethical and moral accountability (Anawati & Verma, 2021). A culture
of gender inclusion included the need to navigate moral and ethical issues society faces. The
#MeToo movement, the murder of George Floyd, and other social injustice events prompted
organizations to become accountable for impactful action toward diversity, equity, and inclusion
(Anawati & Verma, 2021; Feith, 2020; Hardeman et al., 2020). Anawati (2019) described how
society expects ethical and moral accountability in leadership to shape behaviors and attitudes
toward gender equality and inclusion. Sustained change regarding gender-inclusive culture
required commitment to change and action.
Commitment
The continued disparity in higher levels of leadership implies a lack of commitment to
gender equality. Burdfield-Steel et al. (2018) noted how the promotion of women in leadership
included a deliberate commitment to equality through organizational policy, strategy, and
evaluation measurements to ensure a positive impact on gender inclusion. Bayingana et al.
(2021) inferred scarcity of women in senior leadership roles undermined an organization’s
commitment to gender equality. The same authors argued for commitment to gender and racial
equality measures, from equitable selection to development and promotional practices.
Organizational commitment to diversity must include an intentional strategy to enhance the
representation of women of color in leadership (Bell et al., 2023). Organizational commitment to
39

actionable and sustained change towards gender and racial equality sets the foundation for an
effective and equitable leadership journey.
Organizational norms and beliefs create social expectations and commitment to gender
parity in leadership. Burdfield-Steel et al. (2018) argued organizations’ unwavering commitment
to increasing representation of women in C-suite roles includes offering women-centric
developmental opportunities, identifying unconscious gender biases impairing women’s career
advancement, and establishing gendered leadership goals. Kokkonen and Wangnerud (2017)
explained creating a formal and informal organizational commitment to systems and behaviors
cultivating gender-inclusivity in leadership fosters gender equality in workplaces. Integration of
women into C-suite roles requires a commitment to creating gender-balanced work
environments.
Conclusion
Enabling and advancing gender diversity and inclusion must go beyond the presence of
women in the workforce, but also on the leadership platform. The struggle for gender equality
began with the suffrage movement in the1960s and continues to drive the agenda for gender and
racial inclusion through feminist movements, legislation, organizational policies, and culture
(Blount & Tallerico, 2004). A paradox appeared in the 21
st
century as women progressively
earned more advanced degrees, gained a greater presence in the workforce, and ascended to
higher leadership levels (Burke et al., 2017). Despite their education, work experiences, and the
transformational leadership skills necessary in a modern organization, the progress toward
gender and racial parity in C-suite roles has stalled.
In 1986, two Wall Street Journal journalists, Timothy Schellhardt and Carol Hymowitz,
created the glass ceiling metaphor, illustrating an unforeseen and invisible barrier preventing
40

women from reaching their full potential in senior leadership roles (Bertrand, 2018). The same
author noted the glass ceiling erroneously implied a singular, homogeneous barrier only detected
at the highest leadership levels. The glass ceiling metaphor became irrelevant when women
began to penetrate and advance past the absolute barrier into C-suite roles (Carli & Eagly, 2016).
Through the limitations of the glass ceiling, a new metaphor emerged, acknowledging the
discrimination and hurdles women faced from the beginning of their careers.
The research on the leadership gender gap through the female lens showed women faced
obstacles along the path to leadership, from the selection process to development and promotion.
Carli and Eagly (2007) illustrated a more accurate visualization metaphor describing women’s
career advancement experiences. The leadership labyrinth emerged as a complex, non-linear, and
circuitous leadership journey women faced on their quest to C-suite roles (Carli & Eagly, 2007).
The labyrinth recognized women could navigate the leadership maze through diverse strategies
to negotiate and facilitate their way to C-suite positions. The leadership labyrinth’s conceptual
framework showed women's choices along their pathway to leadership were gender differences,
prejudice, and human capital (Carli & Eagly, 2016).
Reinforcing the walls of the leadership labyrinth framework were gender role biases,
challenges of work/home balance, gender style effectiveness, and women’s lack of self-efficacy
(Carli & Eagly, 2016). In the human capital domain, women surpassed men in education levels
but needed more work continuity due to the greater burden of domestic and family
responsibilities (Greiff et al., 2019). Women also had less access than men to developmental
opportunities for career growth. Gender stereotypes and biases created an incongruency between
gender and leadership roles, disadvantaging women’s perception of being effective leaders.
Faced with prejudice, women either became vulnerable and behaved in stereotypic gender roles
41

or showed reactance to better align with leadership traits (Northouse, 2022). Although there was
a lack of clear difference in gender leadership effectiveness in commitment and motivation,
women had less self-efficacy to promote their competence and ability to lead (Dwyer, 2019;
Hoyt & Murphy, 2016). The labyrinth displayed diverse paths leaders took to reach the center of
leadership.
Gender equality, left uncontended, cannot penetrate organizational practices and cultures
to enhance the representation of women in C-suite roles. Ensuring the inclusion of women on the
leadership platform requires deliberate change at societal, organizational, and individual levels
(Clark & Dhatt, 2022). Balanced representation of women and men in leadership must
encompass organizational commitment and accountability to gender inclusion. Organizations
with progressive cultures and systems of commitment towards gender and racial equality goals
and precise measurements for accountability of results cultivated a greater inclusion of women in
C-suite roles (Phipps & Prieto, 2021). Sustained gender and racial parity in leadership require
sustained efforts, commitment, and accountability from individuals, organizations, and society.

42

Chapter Three: Methodology
This study aimed to uncover and explore the experiences and views of women pertinent
to career advancement into senior leadership roles. Although much of the problem of gender
disparity in leadership utilizes quantitative methodology, anecdotal evidence from qualitative
design offers a more comprehensive analysis (Callan et al., 2014). This study used a qualitative
methodology to capture experiences, perceptions, and emotions through interviews with 17
women in elite leadership roles. The narrative inquiry approach collects data through stories and
first-hand accounts of experiences (Anderzen-Carlsson et al., 2020; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Using interviews provided a more detailed understanding of participants' experiences (Almack et
al., 2018). Cannizzo and Strong (2020) note an interview design methodology provides greater
detail from participants' experiences.
In qualitative design methodology, first-person accounts and stories are the data source
for a narrative inquiry (Billups, 2020; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Although researchers have
attempted to explain the reasons for the predominance of men in positions of leadership through
different theories and metaphors, including the glass ceiling, critical theory, intersectionality, or
feminist theory, there are limited studies on the experiences of women who have successfully
attained elite leadership roles (Carli & Eagly, 2007). The existing research on the relationship
between gender and leadership is from surveys and experimental data in entry and middle-level
management (Callan et al., 2014; Carli & Eagly, 2007; Kark et al., 2012;). Capturing women's
experiences in senior leadership roles might empower other women to conceptualize the same
wisdom and navigational skills toward career advancement.
43

Sample and Population
Sampling is a process of selecting a portion of the population to participate in the study,
guided by the research questions and conceptual framework (Creswell & Creswell, 2018;
Farrugia, 2019). Many women are in management roles, but the population under investigation
for this study design are women in C-suite roles. This study examined the lived experiences of
17 women regarding their access to senior leadership roles and what they perceived to be critical
factors along their trajectories. Farrugia (2019) suggested the maximum variation of purposeful
sampling in recruiting participants across a wide dimension of interest and criterion sampling to
select participants based on specific criteria. Based on gender and position title, this study used a
purposeful sampling of 17 women in C-suite roles across diverse industries and in their natural
work settings. Using pseudonyms for this study, participants preserved anonymity and
confidentiality. Appendix A highlights the participant recruitment email.
Instrumentation
This qualitative study used narrative inquiries to examine and understand gender
disparity in senior leadership roles. The online, semi-structured, and open-ended interviews
allow participants to speak openly about their experiences. There were 13 questions investigating
gender differences, human capital, and bias within the labyrinth framework (Appendix B). The
purposive sample of 17 women in executive leadership roles allowed for an in-depth analysis of
how these women overcame challenges in reaching positions of power (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The power of purposeful qualitative sampling stems from in-depth understanding and
information-rich experiences (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The 17 women in this study hold C-
suite roles across various industries and understand the path to upward mobility in organizations.
Understanding the journey through the labyrinth framework and questions exploring how women
44

overcame challenges and obstacles along their path offers practical intervention and direction for
other women seeking senior leadership roles (Cozza & Ceceilia, 2022; McGowan & Stamper,
2022).
Data Collection
Qualitative research is an inductive process design seeking to use word data to uncover
and make meaning of how people understand their experiences in the world (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Data collection was through semi-structured, open-
ended, 60-minute interviews and upon the availability of participants. Providing participants with
interview guidelines and questions before their interview allowed for reflection, preparation, and
ease in case specific questions may elicit emotional responses. These interviews occurred on
Zoom as the participants are over a large geographical area and for convenience. With the
consent of the participants, Denny and Weckesser (2022) suggested recording interviews,
transcribing verbatim, and coding for the emergence of common themes. Online interview
methods can provide greater convivence, ease of use, cost-efficiency, and flexibility (Archibald
et al., 2019; Aungsuroch et al., 2022). Zoom's synchronous internet method allowed for real-time
interactivity with participants involving video, sound, recording, and the ability to view verbal
and non-verbal cues (Archibald et al., 2019). The explanations of how these women navigated
the leadership journey serve as a data source for this research.
Data Analysis
Qualitative research involves identifying patterns, themes, and connections in the data
collection phase through interviews, focus groups, and data analysis (Denny & Weckesser;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Although quantitative and qualitative approaches have strengths and
limitations, numeric data collection of a quantitative research approach cannot capture the stories
45

and experiences of how gender impacts the path to leadership. Broad research questions lead this
study, narrowing the research iteratively to gain an in-depth understanding of the experiences
and perspectives of the participants through a set of 13 interview questions. Organizing, coding,
and refining interview data helped identify common themes for connections and relationships
between codes. Cho (2018) cautions researchers to maintain critical self-reflection,
interpretation, and ethics of their data. The same study suggested recognizing one's positionality
and underlying ethics of research aids with the trustworthiness and credibility of the study.
The Researcher
The key purpose of this study is to develop interventions and understand barriers and
facilitators of change in gender-balanced leadership platforms. Bloomberg and Volpe (2019)
outline a biographical approach where the researcher is the data collection instrument to capture
in-depth insights into participants' experiences, challenges, and recommendations in navigating
the leadership journey. Being explicit about the researcher's social identity in qualitative studies
exposes power relations and transparency in self-reflexive analysis (Jacobson & Mustafa, 2019).
Gender is vital in forming my position as I have experienced challenges and obstacles while
pursuing higher-level leadership roles. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggest having similar
positionality as the participants aid in creating trust and access. By reflecting on how systems of
power and oppression blocked my career advancement, I related to the struggles and challenges
the participants faced in pursuit of elite leadership positions. In critical autoethnography, the
researcher uses data to explore how systems of power in a culture reveal some part of her own
story (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Clarifying positionality in qualitative research helps to uncover how the researcher’s
values and expectations influence the study (Jacobson & Mustafa, 2019). My experiences and
46

biases shaped and influenced my perspectives and interpretation of my study. As an immigrant
woman in the high-technology industry over the past 25 years, I have experienced gender bias
and stereotypes, hindering my advancement to senior leadership roles. As a mother of two, there
was a perception of conflicting priorities with work and family demands. Perception of not being
strong enough to survive the male-dominant cultures of caproate life was a common stereotype
throughout my career. Furthermore, the tragic events of the 9/11 terrorist attacks added to the
association of coming from a terrorist country. Thus, an immigrant woman from a Middle
Eastern country formed a hidden, marginalized identity that hindered my advancement into
senior leadership roles. Researchers assume to have a position impacting the observation and
interpretations they make (Bukamal, 2022). My intersecting identities as an immigrant woman
undoubtedly influences my research process.
Limitations and Delimitations
Understanding the rationale behind a research study aids in the trustworthiness of a study
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Data collection through qualitative research includes identifying the
limitations and delimitations of a study to improve the quality and interpretation of findings.
Limitations refer to potential drawbacks of research design, typically out of the researcher's
control (Dimitrios & Antigoni, 2018). A notable limitation of this study is the sample size.
Although the narrow experiences of 17 participants are noteworthy in a qualitative study, it
provided for only a fraction of women in C-suites, limiting greater applicability. Furthermore,
the study focuses on women across multiple industries, limiting a deeper understanding of
industry-specific implications for women in C-suites. Additionally, this study excluded views of
women who did not persist or gain access to C-suites and men in CEO positions. Understanding
the perspectives of women who, despite their competence and performance, miss access to C-
47

suite levels will shed light on additional mitigating factors. Finally, the study did not include the
perspectives of men within the C-suite to understand their roles, relationships, and
responsibilities toward promoting or hindering the advancement of women.
Delimitations are within the researcher's control and refer to the justifications for the
research design and framework (Dimitrios & Antigoni, 2018). The delimitation of this research
stems in part from the use of the qualitative research method. The use of interviews and
purposeful samples aids in narrowing and an in-depth understanding of the experiences of the
participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Furthermore, the study uses semi-structured and open-
ended interview questions to collect data. This format allows participants to provide historical
information, emotions, and new ideas (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Although a limitation in the
totally of women in the C-suite, the sample size of 17 participants in qualitative research is
significant. This study goes beyond using saturation to validate data collection and focuses
instead on capturing a more significant number of participant narratives to enhance the validity
and reliability of data.
Underlying Ethics
Ethics in research cultivates an emphasis on effective participation and inclusion of
participants. Since power is disproportionately on the side of the researcher, codes of ethics are
essential in protecting the integrity of the research as well as the rights of the participants to
privacy and confidentiality (Roth & Von-Unger, 2018). Hiding participants’ names and
composite stories ensures anonymity. Pseudonyms for individuals and places protected the
participants’ privacy. Furthermore, using unbiased terminology during the interview ensured
clear, honest, and appropriate language. Participants received information about the purpose of
the study, the use of data, and how participation is voluntary. Using an interview confidentiality
48

form eliminated data sharing without consent and allowed participants to speak freely during the
interview (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I avoided disclosing information that could harm the
participants, such as their names, roles, places of work, and backgrounds.
The audiences for this study were women trying to navigate the leadership labyrinth,
participants of the study, policymakers, organizational leaders, practitioners, researchers, and the
dissertation committee. I emphasized different study components in a customized report to the
target groups by focusing the study on the needs of specific groups. I was actively mindful of
ethical issues and took the measures named above to ensure the credibility and trustworthiness of
the study. Women benefit from this study by learning from the experiences of other women who
have reached elite positions of power and how they navigated obstacles and challenges along the
way. The collaborative narratives of participants guide a promising practice of gender parity in
leadership.
The University of Southern California (USC) Institutional Review Board (IRB)
authorized the data collection for this study. Appendix C highlights the information provided to
participants concerning their involvement in the study. Before each interview, I reviewed the
IRB guidance and requirement with each interviewee to ensure complete adherence to ethical
standards.
Summary
Awareness of similarities in participants' stories, experiences, and characteristics in
navigating the leadership labyrinth provides a roadmap for promoting gender equality. The
remedy for inequality is to seek the inclusion of differences and recognition of gendered
identities (Cardona-Lopez et a., 2018). Data collection through a qualitative narrative of semi-
structured interviews of 17 women in C-suite roles guided this study in analyzing the problem of
49

gender disparity in leadership. Participants' storytelling and the researcher's positionality
involved socialization and cultivated an opportunity for rich data collection and analysis
(Richards et al., 2019). Critical qualitative research assumes the data gathered during the
interview about participants' experiences with gender and power relations will lead to some level
of change and action (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). By analyzing women's experiences who have
reached elite leadership roles, the data provided an understanding and pathway for overcoming
challenges and achieving a viable route to the center of the leadership labyrinth.

50

Chapter Four: Findings
This study aimed to uncover and explore the experiences and views of women pertinent
to career advancement to C-suite roles. Using a promising practice approach, this study built on
existing research on the leadership labyrinth to form an emerging framework with evidence-
based success from the narratives of 17 women in C-suite roles. Through a qualitative interview
design methodology, the study analyzed the effectiveness of the leadership labyrinth elements
around human capital, prejudice, and gender differences. The findings suggested intervention
strategies at individual and organizational levels were crucial to promote gender parity in C-
suites. Although the study underpinned gender-based barriers to senior leadership roles, it
exposed how women underleveraged their competence and abilities to challenge the dominant
discourse, impacting their career progression. The questions addressed by this research were:
1. What individual factors facilitated women’s path to C-suite roles?
2. What organizational factors facilitated women’s path to C-suite roles?
3. What is the current state of the leadership labyrinth for mitigating the challenges for
women pursuing C-suite roles?
It is important to note that the focus of the research questions centered on the factors facilitating
a women’s path to the C-suite. Specifically, the women who participated in the study possessed
an innate drive and sense of purpose. In most cases, obtaining C-suite positions was a long-
standing goal and those experiences appear throughout the findings. However, the findings do
not explicitly outline how each participant obtained the requisite knowledge, skills, abilities, and
motivation to persist throughout their early careers and within the C-suite.

51

Participants
Based on gender and position title, this study randomly sampled women in C-suite roles
across diverse industries and in their natural work settings. This qualitative study examined the
lived experiences of 17 women on their access to senior leadership roles and what they perceived
to be critical factors along their trajectories. Data collection was through semi-structured, open-
ended, 60-minute interviews scheduled to meet their availability. A priori (Appendix D) and
posteriori coding informed the findings and subsequent analysis. Providing participants with
interview guidelines and questions before their interview allowed for reflection, preparation, and
processing in case specific questions elicited emotional responses. Conducting the interviews on
Zoom allowed for greater flexibility and reach across a broader geographical area. These
interviews were via Zoom as the participants were over a large geographical area and for
convenience. To protect the anonymity of the participant's identifiable attributes, pseudonyms
replaced actual names with no references to racial elements. Table 2 highlights the general
demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Table 2
Participant Demographics
Participant Background
Anna
Anna is a C-level board member and managing partner in a healthcare company.
She has over 30 years of experience as a technology executive. Her
background is rich in investment banking, corporate finance, and strategic
advisory.
Jenny
Jenny is the chief executive officer (CEO) and co-founder of an apparel
company. She has over 30 years of leadership experience. Her background
includes strategic marketing and product development.
Cindy
Cindy is the CEO and co-founder of a venture capital company. She has over
30 years of leadership experience. Her background includes product
marketing, sales, and revenue growth in high-technology sectors.
52

Participant Background
Dawn
Dawn is the CEO of a biotechnology company. Her background is in the
biopharmaceutical industry. She has over 12 years of leadership experience.
Julie
Julie is a CTO of a software company. She has over 25 years of leadership
experience. Her background is in product development.
Kathy
Kathy is the CEO of a software company. She has over 25 years of leadership
experience. Her background is in technology innovation, revenue growth,
and business development.
Kristy
Kristy is the CEO and founder of a corporate wellness company. She has over
20 years of leadership experience. Her background is in fitness and
wellness.
Lauren
Lauren is a CEO and president of a talent growth company. She has over 25
years of experience. Her background is in human resources, organizational
planning and development, training and development, and staffing.
Leslie
Leslie is the CEO of an advertising company. She has over 15 years of
leadership experience. Her background is in advertising and in leading
multimillion-dollar accounts.
Lisa
Lisa is the chief people officer (CPO) in a high technology company. Her
background is in employment law and human resources. She has over 20
years of leadership experience.
Lucy
Lucy is the CPO at a software company. She has over 30 years of leadership
experience. Her background is in corporate legal services and general
counsel in high technology.
Mary
Mary is the chief legal officer (CLO) at a nonprofit corporation with private
and public financing. She has over 40 years of leadership experience. Her
background is as a corporate attorney, general counsel, and human resources
executive in the public and private sectors.
Nancy
Nancy is the CEO of a consumer health company. She has over 18 years of
leadership experience. Her background is as a board member, investor, and
advisor for startups and venture funds.
Nina
Nina is the chief marketing officer (CMO) in a high-technology company. She
has over 23 years of leadership experience. Her background is in sales and
marketing in the high-technology sector.
Pam
Pam is the chief financial officer (CFO) at a software company. She has over
20 years of leadership experience. Her background is in financial
management positions in the high-technology sector.
Sarah
Sarah is the president of a global commercial services company. She has over
28 years of leadership experience. Her background is in the financial
sector's brand management, marketing, operations, and technology
infrastructures.
Trish
Trish is the chief commercial officer (CCO)in a biotechnology company. She
has over 25 years of leadership experience. Her background is in product
development.

53

Qualitative Findings Overview
Data collection occurred through 17 hours of interviews with analysis of the
underrepresentation of women in C-suite roles at the individual and organizational levels. The
foundation of previous research on gender disparity in leadership alluded to obstacles and
barriers imposed by the majority in leadership, society, organizations, and women’s self-
inflicting limitations. Through the framework of the labyrinth, elements of human capital, gender
differences, and prejudice analyzed the experiences of the 17 women in C-suite roles. The
anticipated and discovered themes originated from research questions around individual and
organizational factors facilitating gender parity in C-suite roles. The findings unraveled the
widely held assumption of women as victims, unable to thrive in a male-dominant leadership
platform. As such, systematically presenting the factors relevant to each research question offers
a lens to better understand a woman's path to the C-suite and provides an opportunity to revisit
the concept of the leadership labyrinth.
RQ 1: Individual Factors
Misdiagnosed as a gender deficit problem, the scarcity of women in C-suites positioned
women as powerless victims of stereotypical beliefs with limited options. Although women
faced barriers throughout their careers, they were equally able to progress into elite leadership
roles. In response to individual factors facilitating women’s advancement, the themes centered
around an optimistic and self-driven labyrinth where women were in control of their leadership
journey, focusing on women as enablers, gender-neutral leadership, and myths of work/life
balance. The findings of this study exposed how women had power and influence over their
careers. The narratives from the participants placed women in control of their leadership journey
by actively shaping their career paths. With the lens of a promising practice methodology, the
54

focus altered from women as victims of societal biases and organizational barriers to drivers and
enablers of change in paving the path forward into C-suite roles. These women possessed the
confidence, competence, and support to prioritize work/life priorities effectively.
Women as Enablers
This study transformed the lens of women in leadership from a deficit to an enablement
model. Advancement to C-suites enhanced when women had a positive mindset and realized
gender was not a limiting factor in their professional growth. Women with a positive attitude and
understanding that gender does not limit their progress cultivated their ascension to the C-suite.
Kristy explained, “for me, it was a combination of perseverance and grit, and every time
someone said I couldn’t do it because I was a woman, it actually motivated me to try harder.”
Despite challenges and boundaries set by organizations and society, these women tenaciously
pushed themselves to thrive in once impermeable roles through a keen focus on self-directed
attributes. The participants in this study took charge of their careers, advocated for themselves,
and had the confidence to achieve their goals regardless of the circumstance. Trish described,
“women have to get rid of self-doubt, or else they will get distracted; what happens along their
career path is not an indication they were not good enough … be goal oriented and have
confidence to keep pushing for outcomes.” Despite the male-centric environment undermining
their effectiveness as a leader, these women became drivers and enablers of progress in their
careers. Sarah noted, “you [women] have to believe in yourself and even if you don’t have all the
answers, you can go learn and grow your careers … you have to enrich your careers every day.”
Aggregated around women as critical enablers and drivers of solutions to gender disparity in
leadership, the narratives highlighted women’s power to take charge of their career trajectories.
55

The intrinsic factors of self-advocacy and self-promotion strengthened and influenced women’s
advancement into C-suites.
Self-Efficacy
Firmer belief in their capabilities enhanced women’s performance. Cognitive ability
impacts how women behave in a social context and as leaders. Kathy suggested, “self-efficacy is
100% the most important thing. Self-assurance is my number one personality strength as
confidence in myself is probably the one determinant of why I’ve been successful.” Self-efficacy
was a predictor of women’s emergence as a leader. Mary remarked, “if I had not been so bold,
pushing for opportunities, I wouldn’t have gone far … I looked in the mirror and said, of course,
I can do this.” The continuum of mastery experiences, achievements, and learnings nurtured the
self-efficacy to succeed in C-suite roles. Lauren emphasized, “self-efficacy is one of the keys to
unlocking the gender disparity problem … women must create the mirror for others to see the
work that they are doing. That will get them noticed.”
Women who endured the skepticism of succeeding in a male-dominant leadership
platform developed the confidence to persevere into C-suite roles. Trish advocated,
Self-efficacy is really important, many times I didn’t get invited to events where there
were mostly men leaders, so I just did things myself; you have to believe in yourself and
have a thick skin to get through being left out by them [men].
Self-efficacy lessened the effects of gender stereotypes as women’s confidence in their
leadership skills overpowered bias. Julie rationalized, “we [women] tend to question ourselves
more than our men colleagues, wondering if we can do it, but if you don’t believe in you, on one
else does.” Collectively, the respondents emphasized the importance of self-efficacy in their
paths to C-suite. However, the application of that confidence manifested in their ability to
56

advocate for their career growth, allowing for self-efficacy to become operational. Women can
contribute to closing the gender disparity gap in leadership with self-efficacy and confidence to
advocate for their career growth.
Self-Promote
Self-promotion was a critical factor in women’s advancement strategy to C-suite roles.
Self-promotion fostered women’s contributions and visibility to senior leadership teams. Mary
explained, “if I hadn’t pushed their [executives] thinking to give me the opportunity, I would
have probably never been given the roles I had, or at least there would have been a delayed
promotion.” Women proactively promoted their achievements and competencies to show a desire
for upward mobility. Julie described, “overtime I learned to say I’m ready and I want a bigger
role and you know, I noticed that men did that all the time.” Perpetuated by the gender stereotype
of men as ambitious leaders, women were reluctant to self-advocate. Trish commented, “actively
showing your impact overshadows the huge unconscious bias where your place is earned based
on results.” Self-promotion created social capital and confidence for women in pursuit of C-suite
roles. By defying gender stereotypes, women created fluidity in the role of gender in leadership.
Gender-Neutral Leadership
The narratives emphasized a set of universal leadership principles without gender
references. Labeling leadership competencies as gender-specific further confirmed masculine
qualities and biases. Nina noted, “if you mix leadership and gender, you will only validate the
bias towards [men] as most leaders are men.” The classification of a woman leader had a
negative connotation as it shed the spotlight on sensitivity towards gender equality rather than
leadership equality. Anna stated, “I was gender-neutral and never wanted to have a gender-
sensitive communication protocol with my colleagues.” Men continued to dominate the
57

leadership platform, but women leaders had to take ownership to highlight their value add. Dawn
commented, “we [women] need to be gender blind ourselves and not let the distribution in any
room bother us from being a great leader.” Leadership became more about how individual
attributes and styles impacted performance and results rather than gender. Cindy summarized the
focus of leadership on performance, “my performance became my intellectual property, and I
became really good at it, and I didn’t let gender affect how I was viewed as a leader.” Gender
differences blurred when women focused on results versus gender. Although women's personal
identities in the C-suite did not impact their leadership effectiveness, their marginalized identities
required greater consideration.
Intersectionality
The intersecting attributes of gender and race created challenges for the women in the C-
suites. However, the six immigrant women and one woman of color noted that racial and ethnic
disparities were not significant barriers to their career advancement.
1
Participant 1 noted:
It’s like mixing milk in your coffee, you can’t separate them, so, because I was a Black
woman, those identities feed off of one another. But it also helped me, I don’t know if he
[CEO] would have been as intrigued by me if I wasn’t both.
Immigrant participants had navigated seamlessly in assimilating into a different culture,
cultivating a proven resilience to thrive in leadership. Participant 2 explained, “as a foreigner,
our mental frame is always to come in with our hands full and on solid ground so we can have an
edge. Immigrant women work hard, they have higher education and drive typically.” Participants
embraced their race and ethnicity as a unique advantage and presented themselves as competent,

1
This study omitted references to racial identities to continue to protect the anonymity of the
participants. For purpose of discussing intersectionality, a random numeric representation of each
participant replaces assigned pseudonyms.
58

professional, and confident leaders. Participant 3 suggested, “I wouldn’t let being an immigrant
woman dictate what I could or couldn’t do; I branded myself as an effective leader by
performing above expectations. Being an immigrant didn’t play a role in being a good leader.”
The intersectionality of participants emphasized their unique and diverse perspectives to drive
business outcomes. By restraining the focus on gender, women in C-suite create a competitive
advantage through the impact of their performance.
Create a Performance Advantage
The most pervasive advantage to women’s advancement into elite leadership roles was
the mindset shift from a focus on gender to performance. The overemphasis on the role of gender
in leadership exacerbated antiquated gender stereotypes. Anna explained, “performance is very
important for a leader, especially women; focus on your performance and be gender neutral.”
Regarding the ability to advance, Cindy noted, “I always worked super hard, delivered above
expectations, and wasn’t resentful and although I saw the pay and title disparities, I decided to
suck it up and perform.” Focus on performance instead of gender helped Jenny as she described,
“I didn’t take comments about gender personally as it didn’t occur to me that I couldn’t do
something because I was a female; that was not an excuse.”
Through concentration on attributes enhancing their performance, women showed the
impact of their leadership skills. Nancy described, “we [women] have to become opposite of
victimhood, we have to take charge and use our talents and expertise to demonstrate our ability
to perform and lead.” Although gender biases impact the pace and path to leadership, women had
to work hard and outperform expectations. Julie shared, “yeah there is bias but we [women] have
to just work harder and take control; it’s like women are walking while men are on moving
walkways, it’s not fair but we can catch up if we walk faster.” The ultimate indicator of
59

leadership was the impact on results. Sarah shared, “my goal was to have a financial impact, not
having a title, that’s where my ambition came from.” Through exceptional performance and
delivering results, women in C-suites shifted the focus to their competence and talent instead of
their gender. Despite their value added through performance, women in C-suites continued to
struggle with the challenges of trying to balance ambitious career goals and family life.
The Myth of Having it All
The notion of work/life balance for women leaders in the C-suite is a myth. The demands
placed on such women shifts the focus to choices, scarifies, and setting priorities. Jenny noted, “I
didn’t view it as becoming a mom, I became a parent, so I didn’t see a gender difference. My
husband and I just made it work; we had nannies too.” Given the deeply embedded systemic
stereotypes and biases toward working mothers in society and organizations, aspiring women
leaders had to renounce the notion of having it all at work and home. Sarah suggested, “we
[women] have to change our standards about what we can do and what we have to delegate to
deploy a tapestry of people to help us at work and home.” For women who decided to have
children, they knew it was not about having it all and getting it right all the time. Dawn
commented:
You have to make sacrifices at times, and it will come at a price. The decision to stay
home or work 16-hour days for a promotion has a price. You need to negotiate what you
can and can’t do. Don’t look for a perfect solution, there isn’t one. I may have to work
into the night if there is a birthday or event, but eventually you have to work harder.
Women juggled work/life demands by scaffolding family obligations through dual
burden parenting, setting flexible expectations, and with patchwork childcare. Dual parenting
was essential for working moms in C-suite roles as their spouses became more engaged in
60

parenting duties. Julie stated, “we decided at some point that only one of us will work full time
crazy and my husband took a step back from his career by working part-time.” Regarding
sharing parental duties, Kathy discussed, “my husband and I are a team, he stayed home with our
kids or else I could not do my [CEO] job.”
As one of the most critical challenges women faced in their career journey, the balance of
work and family was more about choices and consequences than balance. Cindy noted, “I didn’t
have any kids because I couldn’t effectively juggle work and family so that’s a choice I made.”
For women, whose career aspirations fulfilled their needs, becoming a parent was too much of a
sacrifice. Leslie commented, “I chose not to have children. I traveled a lot and had no flexibility
and didn’t want to make sacrifices between work and family.” There was a lack of a universal
solution, as individual circumstances and priorities drove women’s decisions around work/life
choices. Anna added, “thinking about balance as a goal is a terrible way of looking at it, just go
with the flow and do the best you can with what you have.” Women in senior leadership
positions recognized that despite their career progress and coping with family obligations, having
it all reinforced a falsehood of work/life balance. By managing their career and family choices,
women in leadership redirected their efforts to create value through connections.
Networking
Networking and building professional connections enriched women’s confidence,
exposure, and opportunities for career growth into senior C-suite roles. As Mary described, “any
type of a connection, mentors, sponsors, allies can see things in you that you might come up
short with if you were doing your own self-assessment.” Networking gave women a wider circle
of support, expertise, and guidance. Pam described, “I had someone that was advocating for me
who knew me and my capabilities … if you didn’t have that [advocate], you may need other
61

things as an advantage.” Connection with people with varied perspectives, views, and mindsets
encouraged and supported women in their leadership path. Trish highlighted, “I had really good
mentors who were all men in high-level roles that helped me and were behind my growth … they
had daughters and wanted to see me succeed.” Networking provided women with a roadmap to
navigate career challenges and identify opportunities effectively. Lauren summarized, “fostering
relationships with influential people really is a differentiator and it’s the number one thing I’ve
noticed across all women in C-suite.” Collectively, the women in this study pointed to
enablement, gender-neutral leadership, awareness of intersecting marginalized identities,
focusing on performance as a competitive advantage, the myth of trying to balance work/life, and
the value of networking as individual factors critical in advancing women into elite leadership
roles. Enhanced opportunities to grow into C-suite roles required a multi-faceted commitment by
women and organizations.
RQ2: Organizational Factors
Collectivistic organizational cultures and practices enhanced opportunities for women’s
advancement into C-suite roles. Although women played a critical role in their ability to
penetrate elite leadership roles, organizations with gender-inclusive cultures, systems, and
strategies cultivated a platform for women to thrive professionally. Effective organizational
interventions geared toward enhancing gender inclusion in leadership were deliberate, evidence-
based, and contested gender stereotypes. The research question on organizational factors
revealed themes of a culture of intelligence, practiced inclusiveness, organizational commitment,
and accountability.
62

Gender Intelligence
Organizations focusing on gender intelligence cultivated a change in thinking from
gender differences to gender inclusion. The focus of gender intelligence was not on eliminating
gender differences but on understanding, valuing, and leveraging those differences within an
organization. Lauren commented:
We need the blend of attributes that individuals bring to the organization and allow them
to contribute in the most effective way to better themselves and the organization. That
should be the overarching goal, and sometimes too much focus on gender differences gets
in the way of achieving that.
Organizations that embraced and appreciated the variations of behaviors and actions of
all genders improved productivity and innovation. Julie pointed out, “it doesn’t matter if you are
a man or a woman, it’s all about the results and the work that you do which makes great things
happen.” Gender intelligence tapped into the power of different perspectives to create an added
advantage. Trish explained, “it’s all about having a vision and what impact you bring into the
organization … diversity of thoughts is good for leadership and for the organizations.”
Organizations had to move beyond diversity and focus on the inclusivity of women in elite
leadership roles.
Practice Inclusion
Gender parity in C-suite roles required meaningful and deliberate implementation and
progress toward the inclusion of women. Organizations recognizing systemic biases within their
systems and practices realized gender inclusion was more than compliance and nice-to-have.
Anna noted, “they [organizations] should commit to deliberate programs for impacted and
underrepresented groups … there has to be opportunities for everyone.” Practicing workplace
63

inclusion ensured equal opportunities, attracted diverse candidates, and promoted inclusive
mindsets. Leslie shared, “practicing inclusion takes commitment from businesses to say we see
value in diversity and taking more effort and time to find women leaders instead of more white
men.” Organizations must develop concrete policies and programs to reinforce women's
inclusion in senior leadership roles. Organizations tackling gender inequality in senior leadership
roles required intentional inclusion practices, awareness and recognition of unconscious bias, and
equal access to developmental opportunities.
Intentional Inclusion
Gender disparity in leadership continues its trajectory unless organizations become
intentional about inclusion. Nina suggested, “increasing women in leadership is not an organic
process, we [organizations] have to become purposeful in getting more women in the pipeline to
leadership … need to ensure the selection process is inclusive to begin with.” Organizations
with enhanced gender diversity in C-suite levels set inclusion goals. Nancy discussed "they
[organizations] needed to create an ecosystem that encourages and has a goal of helping women
meet their full potential." Intentional inclusion took planned and purposeful action toward gender
inclusion in hiring, development, and promotions. Julie highlighted, "having more women in the
workforce has to be a goal where we commit to having more women executives at all levels by
hiring and promoting them." The commitment to gender inclusion into C-suite roles started from
the top layers of the organization. Pam explained, "he [CEO] advocated for me and for my
capabilities and his mindset for inclusion of women is what got me into the C-level role." The
underrepresentation of women in elite leadership roles involved exposing preconceived gender
stereotypes that implicitly hindered women's inclusion.
64

Unconscious Bias
Awareness and recognition of unconscious gender bias fostered gender-inclusive
practices. Advocating for awareness of implicit gender biases helped expose blind spots and
biases toward women. Lauren explained, “I use the word unintended bias because if you ask the
majority of men in C-levels if they support diversity, they [men] would say yes, but they don’t
understand what they need to do differently.” Identifiable behaviors which led to unconscious
bias were part of organizational efforts to mitigate bias. Anna noted, “unintended bias has a lot to
do with it … people [men] look at a woman and think, she’s probably going to have kids and do
I want her in a leadership role.” Organizations with actionable plans to counteract unconscious
gender bias limited bias in the work systems. Kathy suggested, “if I saw or heard unintentional
bias, I would call it out because it takes people at my level [C-level] who aren’t afraid to call it
out to change the outcome.”
Actions and behaviors to elicit progress toward limiting unconscious bias were
intentional and purposeful. Lisa commented, “leaders have to be purposeful in saying I need to
develop or give this person [women] an opportunity to have visibility, intentionally considering
women for promotions and hiring.” Purposeful inclusion of women in hiring, development, and
promotions required concrete organizational measures to demonstrate and ensure equitable and
diverse workplace practices. Julie summarized:
If I don’t see diversity, I know there is something wrong in the process. It could be that
we don’t do a good job hiring, evaluating, or promoting. I stop all promotions if I see we
are promoting one gender over another. If you don’t purposefully do this [inclusion], then
every year it becomes worse and worse.
65

Organizations viewed the change toward gender inclusion in leadership as a positive
business outcome. Nancy remarked, “diversity innovation paradox is when there is greater
diversity of individuals and perspectives in a group and that company or group becomes more
innovative.” Women in C-suites were deliberate about having other women in the leadership
pipeline. Trish described, “I always looked at the pipeline to ensure there were women
candidates … with underrepresentation and unconscious bias, you need to at least equalize the
field.” Despite efforts geared towards diversity in the workforce, deliberate gender inclusion
efforts were critical in leadership development practices.
Developmental Opportunities
Access to gender-inclusive leadership development opportunities provided organizations
with a pipeline of qualified women with a greater focus on diversity of experiences. Sarah
summarized the need to focus on inclusion in development initiatives, “organizations have a
responsibility to develop talent if we want to live up to the values of DEI and the unique needs of
different people.” The goal of professional development was to grow competence rather than
titles. Pam suggested:
Becoming a CFO was not something I really aspired to … I worked hard and had
operated in various businesses, knew the company well, and wasn’t hesitant to share my
point of view. My boss one day asked me if I be interested in taking his role as a CFO.
C-suite women grew their capabilities by experimenting and taking on challenging projects and
roles.
Women on the senior leadership trajectory often took on uncomfortable, risky, and
stretched career growth opportunities. Dawn commented, “I did get an opportunity for growth
when I was given a quite uncomfortable job because no one else could do it.” Kathy added, “I
66

would change industries and even functions … I would sprint over to any opportunity that could
likely bring a broad range of experiences that I could apply to different things.” Aspiring women
leaders demonstrated a willingness and adaptability to travel and move, as necessary. Leslie
explained, “I moved around a lot and wasn’t afraid to take risks and go for something that was a
huge opportunity. I moved to keep my options open.” Mary pointed out, “they [organization] had
me in charge of all the international lawyers around the world so I traveled every placed
imaginable.” Strategies to foster a culture of gender inclusivity in leadership required
commitment and accountability throughout the organization.
Organizational Commitment
Explicit organizational commitment to providing women with more significant
development and career opportunities enhanced gender balance in C-suites. As Leslie suggested,
"it takes commitment from the business to say there is value in women in leadership and
diversity, commitment to take a little more effort and time to find women leaders." Organizations
set specific gender-inclusive goals to ensure a diverse candidate pipeline. Julie described, "we
[organizations] should commit to looking at the numbers and set goals of having women at levels
of leadership, hiring women, and supporting them to get promoted." Organizational cultures with
equality woven into their work practices fostered opportunities for advancement for women in
leadership roles. Leslie suggested, "it takes commitment from the business to say there is value
in women in leadership and diversity, and they have taken more effort and time to find women
leaders instead of finding more White men." When focused on an environment where diverse
leaders thrived and felt supported, Sarah noted, "organizations play a big role in making a
conscious effort to help women fit where they don't feel they belong … they [organizations] have
to value DEI and support needs of different people."
67

Commitment to gender diversity in leadership inspired other women to reach for once
impenetrable roles. Lucy explained,
We [women] represent more than half of the population and more than half of the
customers, and every company has more than half the workers that are women, so why
wouldn't a company want a diverse leadership team so it's speaking to the entire
population versus a portion of it?
Organizational commitment to inclusive policies and work practices increased the workforce's
full potential. Mary noted, “if you don’t have a culture that is committed and values the potential
of its workforce, then the organization is far less likely to get the best out of you or to discover
the best in you.” Representation of women in C-suites was the most impactful way to show
commitment to gender equality in leadership teams. Implementing and maintaining a
commitment to gender-inclusive leadership practices necessitated a process to measure progress.
Organizational Accountability
Effective gender equality outcomes in leadership included a comprehensive
accountability process. Organizations with gender balance targets held stakeholders accountable.
Anna discussed, “there has to be accountability mechanism in place for inclusion where
organizations continuously look at what is the composition of middle manages … it’s all about
money, so investors need to check to ensure there is gender balance in leadership.” Executive
accountability played a crucial role in gender parity in leadership. Nancy shared, “in my
experience, the only person who can drive that [accountability] type of culture is the CEO … if
the CEO doesn’t model that, it’s not going to happen.” Pam had a different perspective, “boards
have to hold the CEO accountable; shareholders have to hold them [boards] accountable.”
68

Gender parity goals enhanced executive decision-making and accountability. Lucy noted,
“you [organizations] need to set hard goals for leadership at every level … you have to attack
hiring, retention, and promotion efforts … you [organization] need data and analysis, and you
need goals that are equitable, not just equal.” Organizations with enhanced gender parity in
leadership developed concrete gender-balanced goals, measured and evaluated them, and held all
stakeholders accountable for results. Sarah suggested, “the ultimate accountability sits with
boards, but the focus has to be around accountability to all stakeholders.”
Closing the gender gap in leadership requires proactive steps by the organization to build
a culture of inclusivity. Organizations with gender-balanced leadership teams focus on the value
men and women bring to the organizations versus what differentiates them. These organizations
practiced intentional inclusion by ensuring their work practices were inclusive and that there was
an awareness of how unconscious bias impacted talent decisions. Commitment to organizational
goals towards gender inclusion in leadership focused on hiring, promoting, and developing
women into leadership roles. A systematic process to review, evaluate, and measure progress
towards inclusion goals ensured an institutionalized organizational accountability system.
Leadership gender mainstreaming included a well-defined framework, gender-balanced goals,
and accountability mechanisms to reinforce organizational commitment.
RQ3: Mitigating Gender Disparity
Mitigating gender disparities begins with the realization that a position within the C-suite
is not an entitlement. The respondents in this study repeatedly commented on the traditional
beliefs stemming from a glass ceiling or prejudicial barriers to entry. Trish noted, “yes, there is a
huge unconscious bias against putting a woman in C-suites, but impact overshadows bias, and
the title will be earned based on results.” The participants exposed the realization of a misguided
69

approach to mitigating gender disparity in leadership from a focus on victimhood to a space of
privilege where emotional, social, and gender intelligence were the differentiators. Kathy
discussed, “The entitlement mindset hindered efforts to mitigate gender disparity in C-suites; the
C-suites, regardless of gender, was a privileged space where a distinct set of characteristics and
outlook were the premise to access. Dawn noted, “I don’t think the problem is gender difference;
I think it’s about working hard and having a thick skin like promotions for me didn’t come
overnight; I worked hard and earned my way up.”
The women in C-suites indubitably earned their titles through hard work, personal
sacrifices, and a drive to circumvent hurdles to leadership. Lauren explained, “the women I’ve
seen in C-suite understand that growth is an iterative process; you need to continue to evolve,
learn, grow, and show the value you bring to the organization.” As competent leaders, women in
C-suites viewed leadership as an accountability to work harder, gain greater competence, focus
on impact, and perform above expectations. Anna summarized:
Women need to violently focus on performance, take risks. I had a deep sense of purpose
and wanted to raise money for the company. I just wanted to perform and not let setbacks
get in my way. I constantly wanted to improve myself. I had an unconscious gender
attitude. I don’t care who I am and who is working with me; I let things roll off my back.
Don’t feel entitled; focus on performance and what value you bring.
Pursuing C-suite roles required taking risks, continuously developing competencies, and
exposure to new opportunities. Lucy remarked, “be willing to take different and challenging
opportunities without having all the necessary skills, become a high-level learner and get out of
your comfort zone … work hard even through your discomfort and trust in yourself.” Lisa
remarked, “important in chief level role to develop a wide area of skills because you need to be
70

able to talk to the board and be really knowledgeable about the business … need to grow your
skills to become a super generalist.” The role of an individual in the leadership labyrinth became
an active driver and facilitator of their career advancement, where women had to unlearn the
erroneous view of leadership as a one size fit playbook.
At an organizational level, mitigating gender disparity in leadership requires a diverse,
inclusive, and learning-oriented culture. Organizational cultures with a high commitment and
accountability to gender inclusion emphasize learning. Kathy described, “if you want to be
successful in growing your career, you need to work for a company where you see yourself
presented, where you feel like you belong.” A culture of inclusivity and learning empowered and
enabled women to architect a mindset to drive business results, seek growth opportunities, and
dismantle mental barriers. Jenny explained, “I didn’t want anatomy to be an excuse for why I
couldn’t do something … what is important for women is to have a learning mindset where they
want organizations where they can learn more and do bigger and better things.” The change in
basic assumptions from victims of gender disparity to enablers of change expanded women’s
influence and power over their career advancement into higher leadership roles. Beth remarked,
“you need to decide if you want to be a leader; then if it’s about leadership, let’s just call it what
it is; it’s a type of a role, a mindset, and not about gender.” Enhanced gender balance in C-suites
necessitated high-impact, self-driven interventions focused on results, learning, and
perseverance.
Organizations need to be more thoughtful about what it means to develop future leaders.
Organizational accountability toward gender-balanced leadership included a formal process to
monitor and measure the development and advancement of women. Lucy explained, "in our
organization, we have goals for women to become leaders … we did everything from getting
71

them coaches, helping them grow and get a promotion. We monitor how many women were put
up for promotion."
Organizations took intentional gender-inclusive actions to address prejudice and facilitate
women ascending to senior leadership roles. Nina summarized, "organizations have to set goals
and targets for getting more women into senior level jobs and not allow gender to play a role in
leadership decisions; it takes commitment from CEO and accountability from all leaders
throughout the organization." With a renewed lens on women as the nucleus and drivers of their
leadership labyrinth, the role of the organizations was to create an environment dedicated to
facilitating and empowering women to become champions of their leadership journey.
Conclusion
The narratives and lived experiences of the 17 participants collectively validated a
mindset shift on how women and organizations approached and addressed gender disparity in C-
suites. The focus was on the opportunity for women to take charge of their career growth through
self-advocacy and self-efficacy to gain access to opportunities and visibility for their
accomplishments. With drivers of their leadership journey, women worked hard, continuously
developed the competence to deliver exceptional results, and built a network of strategic
connections to support their career growth. Women in C-suites adopted a genderless leadership
approach where resilience, persistence, and hard work moderated the impact of unconscious
gender bias.
The organizational commitment to cultivate an accommodative and intentional gender-
inclusive culture was critical in promoting gender parity in C-suites. Organizations achieved
gender-balanced leadership when women had support and access to developmental opportunities,
when there was an awareness of unconscious gender bias, and gender differences became a
72

source of creativity and innovation. The organizational accountability systems ensured the
monitoring and measuring of progress toward gender parity in leadership, where the CEO and
the board were ultimately liable to foster a culture of equity and inclusion for everyone.
Organizations with strategies for intentionally including women in development programs
positioned women as the central drivers of their career path to C-suite roles. The study findings
established a need for a modernized leadership labyrinth framework through a lens of women as
enablers and drivers of their leadership journey and organizations as facilitators of inclusive
opportunities and commitment to growth and learning.

73

Chapter Five: Discussion
Contemporary organizations require transformative and effective leaders who can
stimulate a high-performing workforce to drive exceptional business results. As half of the
population and talent pool, women immensely impact creating a competitive advantage for
organizations. Furthermore, the entry and progression of women leaders can accelerate a robust
leadership pipeline, leading to inclusive leadership teams. Despite a small representation of
women in senior leadership roles and their impact on business results, there continues to be a
ubiquitous gender gap in C-suites (Chengadu & Scheepers, 2017). Most research and reports on
gender disparity in leadership suggest women continue to be victims of workplace barriers such
as gender stereotypes, work/life balance challenges, and lack of access to developmental
opportunities (Klenke, 2017). Given the persisting underrepresentation of women in C-suite
roles, there is an opportunity to reframe gender disparity in leadership from a problem of practice
to a promising practice approach.
The shift from emphasizing women as victims of their gender to women as enablers of
their leadership journey uncovers ways women can thrive and attain C-suite roles. Understanding
these enablers overpowers the internalized interpersonal and organizational impediments women
face through their leadership path. This study uncovered factors fostering women's advancement
into C-suite roles. Through a promising practice approach, this study builds on existing research
on the leadership labyrinth to form an emerging framework with evidence-based success from
the qualitative narratives of 17 women in C-suite roles. The findings suggest intervention
strategies at individual and organizational levels are crucial in promoting gender parity in C-
suites. Although the study reinforces gender-based barriers to senior leadership roles, it exposes
how women under-leverage their competence and abilities to challenge the dominant discourse,
74

impacting their career progression. The findings from this study point to a multi-layered
approach to framing the problem itself, the critical beliefs and behaviors of women pursuing the
C-suites, and the continual processes and policies required of organizations. The following
research questions offer a deeper understanding of the factors impacting women's Access to C-
suites:
1. What individual factors facilitated women's path to C-suite roles?
2. What organizational factors facilitated women's path to C-suite roles?
3. What is the current state of the leadership labyrinth for mitigating the challenges for
women pursuing C-suite roles?
The findings of this study suggest the current and historical approaches to gender
disparity in leadership have erroneously highlighted gender as the primary constraint in women's
path to senior leadership roles. The participants' narratives challenge the notion that ascending to
C-suite roles is an entitlement. Instead, C-suite roles are ideal for women who have the
aspirations, dedication, and resilience to lead with an emphasis on impact as a differentiator.
These women earn their place on the leadership platform through hard work, a keen focus on
driving business results and rejecting the notion of being victims of gender stereotypes.
Navigating a successful path to C-suite roles requires proactively seeking opportunities to learn,
grow, and develop the breadth of work experience. As drivers and enablers of their leadership
journey, C-suite women create a support system to prioritize work/life obligations.
The external enablers of gender parity in C-suites require facilitative organizations with
commitment and accountability toward gender-inclusive work systems and culture. The
foundation of gender enablement organizations fosters deliberate inclusion practices,
unconscious bias awareness, and access to leadership development opportunities. Through
75

identifying, monitoring, and evaluating drivers of gender inclusion, organizations create an
environment for women with the necessary desire, competency, and drive to advance into C-
suite roles. Organizational commitment and accountability toward setting and attaining gender-
inclusive goals ensure the creation of cultures and work practices where all employees have
access to career development opportunities.
The collective responses point to reframing the Carli and Eagly (2007) leadership
labyrinth outlining individual and organizational roles and responsibilities to address gender
disparity. Additionally, as discussed in Chapter Four, the responsibility for obtaining the critical
knowledge, skills, abilities, and motivation primarily resided within the individual women. As
such, to better understand the current environment, challenges, and opportunities, it is essential
to revisit the labyrinth women face navigating to the C-suite.
Modern Day Labyrinth
Through narratives of women in C-suites, a paradox of realities emerged, contradicting
the long-held beliefs of women as casualties of their gender. The initial labyrinth outlined a
deficit model where gender differences, prejudice, and human capital barriers disrupted women's
career advancement. Carli and Eagly's (2007) leadership labyrinth perpetuated gender as the
main instigator for the underrepresentation of women in senior leadership roles. Leslie argued:
We are women, what are we going to do with it? I am not going to hide it. Don't try to
look or act like a man, even if that's expected. It's not a handicap; deal with it if it bothers
you; just perform.
The maze of the labyrinth for women in C-suite roles was more than a series of dead-end paths,
detours, and obstacles along the way. Effective interventions to address gender disparity in C-
76

suites focused on how women were the drivers of change in their career advancement with
foundational support from organizations.
The updated leadership labyrinth (Figure 2) is a transformative metaphor for women
navigating their path to C-suite roles through perseverance, hard work, and focus on results. The
concept highlights the journey women must take to arrive at the C-suite and, more importantly,
remain within the C-suite. The women in this study painted a picture beyond a simple
destination. Julie explained, "I just worked hard … I think it's a lesson about being tough, being
thick skinned, having the grit to do whatever it takes to deliver results." The emerging women's
leadership labyrinth had continuous and circular individual and organizational elements along
the path to the C-suite. Jenny referenced "I think there are different labyrinths depending on
where we are and what we do but they [labyrinths] are definitely self-driven and they focus on us
as leaders and not just women." In the updated labyrinth, women became ambitious enablers and
drivers of their leadership journey, where gender differences and biases were not inhibitors of
progress to career advancement. Sarah explained, "we all have unconscious biases and become
victims of it … I worked hard, and I overcame it; I sought development opportunities, and I was
always on a quest to learn and grow. My goal was to have an impact." Through allies, mentors,
and sponsors, women aggregated a network of expertise to help them mitigate challenges and
conflicts along their path to C-suites.
Another element of the renewed labyrinth was the focus on the organization's role in
creating a culture of commitment and accountability to gender inclusivity in leadership.
Organizational commitment established a formal process where women had access to
concentrated leadership development and growth opportunities beyond generic management
training. Julie pointed out, "organizations can make sure the culture is amazing by hiring women
77

and promoting them because if it's [culture] not amazing for women and men equally, guess it's
not an amazing culture." Inclusive leadership development programs integrated gender inclusion
in design creation instead of afterthought accessibility. Organizational outcome-led
accountability systems ensured liability for sustained progress, results, and innovation.

Figure 2
Modern-Day Leadership Labyrinth (Gamini, 2023)

78

Nancy referenced the organizational role in gender diversity:
Unconscious bias contributes to the need for inclusion at the highest ranks of an
organization. Organizations need to commit to diversity as it leads to better outcomes, but
innovation never gets credited to the diverse members in organizations never receive
credit for innovation, and those outcomes don't yield to better professional outcomes for
those diverse members.
The modern-day labyrinth highlights the challenges women and organizations face in
both understanding and mitigating gender disparity in the C-suite. The following section outlines
the recommendations for practice aligned with the RQs. Additionally, an implementation
strategy using the Burke-Litwin change model offers insights into the holistic approach required
to address gender disparity within the C-suite with changes to transformational, transactional,
and individual-level factors. Finally, the chapter concludes with a discussion of the limitations
and delimitations, areas for future research, and an overall summary.
Recommendations for Practice
This study exposes individual and organizational factors for effectively facilitating
women's path to C-suite roles. Although the leadership journey continues to have hurdles and
challenges, women with the necessary drive and aspiration to reach C-suite roles can establish
their identity as successful leaders without inferences to gender (Beeri et al., 2015). Navigating
the leadership journey challenges women to transform their outlook from powerless victims of
gender to empowerment and enablers of creating business impact (Annis & Nesbitt, 2017;
Hoobler et al., 2018). Understanding the individual and organizational enablers that foster
women's career advancement requires a transformative narrative in exploring the role gender
plays in women's path to C-suites. Specifically, the recommendations for practice stemming
79

from this study set a path towards reframing the perceptions of the C-suite and the inherent
challenges working in this environment, reframing the mindset of women pursuing roles in the
C-suite, and reframing how organizations create and sustain an inclusive workplace at the
highest levels. Table 3 highlights the recommendations aligned with each research question.

Table 3
Table of Recommendations
Research question Recommendation
1 Women need to improve self-advocacy and self-efficacy.
1 Women need to seek development opportunities.
1 Women need to develop strategic connections.
1 Women must drive business results and impact.
1 Women must create a performance advantage.
1 Women must compromise on work/life obligations.
2 Organizations must commit to a culture of inclusion.
2 Organizations need to develop accountability metrics.
2 Organizations need to create an awareness of unconscious bias.
2 Organizations need to create gender-inclusive developmental opportunities.
3 Organizations need to reframe expectations in C-suite.
3 Organizations must center leadership over gender.

80

RQ1: Individual Factors: Facilitating Women’s Path to C-suite
Women are enablers and influencers of their advancement into C-suite roles. A critical
element of success for women in C-suites is acknowledging their power to proactively take
charge of their career progression to become drivers of their leadership labyrinth. This study
indicates women in C-suite must redirect the focus from women as victims of gender stereotypes
to women as powerful enablers where challenges and barriers on their leadership journey pose as
opportunities to learn and grow. The self-efficacy in their leadership competence and confidence
to overcome barriers are critical skills in surviving and thriving in a male-dominant C-suite role.
Through self-promotion, women in C-suites take control of their career development by actively
spotlighting evidence of their impact, contributions, and influence (Hoobler at al., 2018).
Recommendation: Improve Self-Advocacy and Self-Efficacy
Women must display compelling levels of self-efficacy and self-advocacy throughout
their leadership journey. Women with strong self-efficacy can securely reject or dismiss gender
stereotypes and biases (Dooley et al., 2019). Women should actively and routinely negotiate on
challenging development opportunities, high-exposure job assignments, and fair salaries and pay
increases. Confidence promotes the ability of women to advocate for themselves and elevate
their voices, ideas, and suggestions in creating business impact. Leadership self-efficacy “has
been linked to better leader performance and to more interest and effort towards becoming a
better leader” (Alvarez-Huerta et al., 2022, p. 76). Self-efficacy and the ability to speak up about
work-related issues and self-promotion to seek opportunities are critical in women’s career
advancement (Bandura et al., 2018).
The findings from this study suggest women leaders require self-confidence in their skills
and knowledge to motivate and influence others effectively. Through projecting self-efficacy,
81

women align themselves with positive individual and organizational outcomes, including an
increased presence on the leadership platform (Eibl et al., 2020). Women in the C-suite require
exceptional levels of self-efficacy in their capabilities to successfully drive business results.
Leaders with high levels of self-efficacy are high-performing and over-achieve in business
outcomes (Bajaba et al., 2018; Bembenutty & Herndon, 2017). The study encourages women to
self-promote their interests in seeking development opportunities toward career advancement.
Recommendation: Seek Development Opportunities
Women in C-suite need to self-advocate for career development and growth. The results
suggest women must actively take charge of initiatives and opportunities to develop their
leadership skills and advance their careers. Dynamic career management requires a self-directed
approach to planning, developing, and implementing career goals (Hirschi & Koen, 2021).
Through self-development and ownership of their leadership growth, women ensure progress and
accountability for their career advancement. As part of their self-advocacy to grow, the findings
demonstrate how C-suite women possess skills in self-promoting their credentials and
accomplishments to exhibit their readiness for higher-level roles. Given women’s tendency to
plan their careers around their personal life, an intentional and planned career planning process
will foster skills development, access to fulfilling positions, and self-confidence to pursue
higher-level roles (Doering, 2023). In conjunction with career development, the participants
suggest women routinely take the opportunity to examine their strengths and areas for
improvement and look for ways to refine and elevate their leadership skills and experiences. As
part of their leadership development process, the participants take risks and self-advocate to take
on stretch and challenging assignments and roles. These challenging experiences develop their
leadership competencies in new and demanding ways, aiding in creating a leadership brand
82

(Cook, 2022). Women in C-suite develop their skills through various resources such as
participating in leadership development programs, seeking challenging work assignments,
identifying mentors for support, and actively building strategic network connections.
Recommendation: Develop Strategic Connections
Fostering a network of strategic relationships and connections is a critical support system
for women aspiring to advance into C-suites. Findings show how magnifying the impact of
building a robust network of connections is a powerful tool to help women gain confidence and
access resources, experiences, and counsel on mitigating challenges along their leadership path.
Women with strategic connections “are almost twice as likely to believe they can clinch
leadership roles” (Sita & Swati, 2020, p. 26). These connections are critical to helping elevate
and advance women by providing diverse perspectives on business and personal challenges. The
participants in this study effectively cultivate a network of connections to help them navigate the
nuances and challenges in their professional and personal lives. The male-dominant leadership
platform requires women to create a strong network of allies, sponsors, mentors, and professional
connections in dealing with career opportunities, leadership challenges, and organizational
obstacles (Alphonso et al., 2015). Strategic connections promote opportunities for developing
collaboration, competence, and confidence, impacting business results.
Recommendation: Drive Business Results and Impact
Impact signifies success in C-suite roles. Research is shifting away from gender as a topic
of leadership discussions to experience, proven record of accomplishment, and impact on
organizational performance measurements in C-suites (Klenke, 2017). This evidence-based study
exposes how women in C-suites leverage their contributions and impact on business results to
display their effectiveness as leaders. The shift toward displaying their business acumen and
83

leadership competencies elicits sustainable validation for women in C-suites (Annis & Nesbitt,
2017). The results of this study demonstrate how focus on gender in leadership provokes gender
stereotypes. Defining leadership through gender characteristics further amplifies systematic
gender differences (Flabbi et al., 2019). By exhibiting their leadership impact on business results
and the organization's performance, women in C-suite must shift the narrative from focusing on
gender to their impact as the differentiator. Therefore, the role of the individual becomes a key
enabler in defining leadership in C-suites.
Recommendation: Create a Performance Advantage
Women in C-suite distinguish themselves through superior performance. Successful
women in C-suites elevate their performance and contributions, superseding gender stereotypes.
By exhibiting performance as key differentiator and transformational leadership style, women
can create a performance advantage (Chen & Shao, 2022). A tangible way for women to show
impact is through developing leadership competence, surpassing performance expectations, and
delivering results (Jay & Morgan, 2016; Post, 2015). The chief-level roles demand leaders who
exemplify performance excellence, confidence in their abilities, and perseverance to overcome
personal and professional obstacles. The study emphasizes a stronger focus on performance with
efforts on continuous learning, projecting excellence in leadership competence, and finding a
compromise with work/life balance.
Recommendation: Compromise on Work/Life Obligations
Work/life balance is a myth in the C-suite. Although work/life balance has been a
prominent factor in why women exit or do not enter the leadership labyrinth, this study suggests
women must alter their expectations from balancing to managing work/life obligations. The
focus for women in leadership is on embracing the imbalance and understanding the realities of
84

being a career woman, where there must be trade-offs between work/life priorities (Cho et al.,
2016). Research is starting to show “women leaders with social support initiatives with
life/balance conflict have acknowledged improved relationships and enhanced job satisfaction”
(Brue, 2018, p. 221). Women in C-suites recognize how their leadership ambition and aspirations
require a conscious and effortful measure to seek support for the challenges of family
responsibilities, understand there are trade-offs, and set realistic expectations of competing
work/life demands. The over-emphasis on work/life balance is a misconception where the
imbalance creates guilt and vulnerability, hindering the drive and confidence to pursue higher
leadership roles (Lapierre et al., 2018; Phipps & Prieto, 2016). The participants collectively
acknowledge their career aspirations and accept work/life commitments not as a balance but as a
compromise. Allocation of resources between family, social, and organizational support systems
can effectively mitigate work/life responsibilities.
RQ2: Organizational Factors: Facilitating Women’s Path to C-Suite
The interplay between gender and organizational practices requires reframing the role of
organizations in creating gender-inclusive strategies. Organizational transformation toward
facilitating women’s path to C-suites requires a multilevel process encompassing organizational,
individual, and structural changes (Burk & Noumair, 2015). Although individual factors drive
learning and growth, “they are influenced by the surrounding physical and organizational
environment” (French et al., 2022, p.117). Regulative frameworks cannot address the implicit
gender biases inherent in organizational practices and their impact on women's career
advancement. This study finds that organizations must pave the path for women leaders by
adopting gender-inclusive work practices and cultures where gender intelligence becomes the
core differentiator in leadership. Data from this study recommends a renewed set of expectations
85

from organizations to create awareness and understanding of unconscious gender bias, establish
and communicate clear gender-inclusive goals and strategies, and hold stakeholders accountable
for delivering on gendered inclusive goals and commitments.
Recommendation: Commitment to a Culture of Inclusion
Organizations must commit to an intentional and inclusive approach to leadership. Data
from the study recommends organizations resist allowing gender characteristics to play a role in
leadership practices by reframing a well-articulated commitment to equal access to senior
leadership roles. Such practice allows for the emergence of a different model of leadership
practice centering on competence, performance, and potential while enhancing gender parity.
Organization’s “measurable recognition of DEI could be a highly important competitive strategy
variable” (Amoros-Martinez et al., 2019, p. 2). Going beyond awareness of gender bias,
organizations with deliberate gender-inclusion will be “creating cultures of mutual learning and
integration of women as part of the essence of firm culture” (Kossek & Lee, 2020, p. 6).
Findings recommend organizations create a systemic commitment to inclusive leadership
by establishing gender-sensitive goals in hiring, development, and promotional practices. Such
organizational commitment to gender inclusion ensures women are in the pipeline for each
leadership vacancy. By taking purposeful steps in the composition of leadership teams and
becoming transparent in communicating strategies, measurements, and ownership for gender
inclusion, organizations commit to accountability toward gender balance in professional and
career opportunities (Bell et al., 2023; Robertson & Tasso, 2017). By actively establishing
leadership development opportunities, organizations can further deliberate efforts to develop
aspiring women leaders with the potential to enter the pipeline into C-suite-level roles.
86

Recommendation: Develop Accountability Metrics
Without clear accountability measures, organizations cannot enable gender parity in
leadership. Data from the findings magnifies organizational accountability beyond policymaking
and compliance to include formal performance management systems and leadership
accountability for the advocacy and inclusion of women with the potential to rise to C-suite
roles. Organizations should utilize data and metrics to actively establish, measure, and evaluate
gender-inclusion work practices (Bhembe et al., 2021). The CEO, as the chief strategist of
inclusion practices, must establish the expectation where efforts toward gender inclusion in
leadership are a responsibility as well as an opportunity for all stakeholders. Accountability
toward gender-neutral leadership focuses on gender intelligence, whereas leadership attributes
focus on results, performance, and impact.
The change in basic assumptions to a gender intelligence mindset in leadership requires a
radically new framework for understanding, designing, and evaluating leadership programs
based on appreciating the different perspectives and impacts men and women bring to the
leadership platform. The CEO must establish an accountability mechanism for all leaders by
measuring the progress and results of narrowing the gender gap in leadership. The performance
management evaluation can be the basis for creating gender-inclusion goals for all leaders.
Additionally, regular reports on selection, development, promotion, and compensation are
necessary to provide data on monitoring accountability metrics. The role of managers at the
transactional level is essential in ensuring change initiatives in gender-inclusion goals carry from
transformational to individual levels.
87

Recommendation: Create Awareness of Unconscious Bias
Organizations inadvertently perpetuate gender bias in leadership. Gender equality in
leadership practices fallaciously burdens women to adopt male-centric characteristics, as the
majority in senior leadership roles are men. The findings uncover the need for organizations to
assess their role in unintentionally perpetuating gendered leadership stereotypes. Organizations
must foster a culture where women develop their unique leadership styles instead of
continuously defying unconscious gender stereotypes in leadership (Andrade & Madsen, 2018;
Ensari & Lopez, 2014)). The participants highlight how gender is a social construct, and
organizations must deliberately distinguish between gender and leadership traits. Creating
awareness and understanding of unconscious gender stereotypes and their impact on women
leaders facilitates gender parity in senior leadership roles. Organizations must “expose decision-
making biases, institutionalize structures, rules, and practices that make biased uses of evidence
less likely” (Parkhurst, 2017, p.107). Conducting regular bias training, including immediate and
delayed pre-post evaluations, must include ways for managers to establish employee
performance and development goals on objectively measurable metrics. By unpacking the
assumptions underpinning certain leadership expectations and the prejudices to which they give
rise, organizations create awareness around unconscious bias (Foley & Williamson, 2018).
Mitigating unconscious gender biases promotes a culture of gender inclusivity.
Recommendation: Create Gender Inclusive Developmental Opportunities
Intentional gender-inclusion in the development process is essential to fostering women’s
advancement into C-suites. The findings show organizations must offer women the same
challenging and stretch assignments as men to ensure women develop the necessary capability
and knowledge to advance their careers. Organizational-driven development plans for women
88

must incorporate challenging opportunities, experiential learning, and connecting desired
behaviors to business outcomes (Hall et al., 2018). The study asserts cultivating a high-potential
program to develop women leaders for leadership opportunities. Additionally, developing
aspiring women leaders creates a robust leadership pipeline. Diversity in leadership development
leads to “better performance, profits, and positive employee outcomes” (Singh & Vanka, 2020,
p. 25). Through the creation of formal mentoring programs, women can establish allies with
senior leadership members (Colby, 2021). Mentors can steer critical assignments and projects,
include women in high-exposure meetings, and endorse high-potential women for promotions.
Mentors play an essential role in gender-inclusion decisions in leadership, as most career
advancement decisions occur when women are absent or have a voice (Colby, 2021; Kruger &
Nel, 2019).
Organizations must establish a formal employee development process with development
goals as part of the performance review cycle. Organizations should proactively and intentionally
support women's career development and growth to ensure they have equal access to a career
development plan (Madsen, 2018; Wright, 2021). Every employee must complete an individual
development plan during the performance evaluation review. Furthermore, the basis for
performance feedback must be on specific business outcomes, given women clarity on factors
women can enhance performance and advance their careers. A review of development plans
must include feedback on progress toward setting goals.
RQ3: Mitigating Gender Disparity in C-Suite
Gaining access to C-suites is an earned privilege. The C-suite level roles are selective and
coveted positions at the top of the leadership hierarchy. Reaching these leadership roles requires
a proven record of accomplishments, success, and exceptional interpersonal abilities. The
89

findings of this study prompt the need to change the complacency about what it takes to gain
access to and stay in C-suites. Researchers often use metaphors to explain the
underrepresentation of women in leadership; however, such metaphors primarily focus on
societal stereotypes or organizational barriers (Kemp et al., 2018). These metaphors generate
misconceptions about the role of gender in leadership, often ignoring the role of women in
leadership. The power and influence of C-suite roles demand disproportionately high levels of
confidence, drive, and competence, regardless of gender. The distorting image of the C-suite as a
destination granted to anyone who wants it sets out the wrong expectation about the persistent
sacrifice, hard work, and output required to be a successful chief-level executive. With a strong
sense of self-awareness, self-efficacy, and self-empowerment, the landscape of the C-suite shifts
to a space where earning access is through proven success in performance, results, and a
compelling learning mindset.
Recommendation: Reframe Expectations in C-suite
The C-suite is not an entitlement. The chief-level platform rejects the disabling mindsets
of entitlement and infallibility and demands a learning mindset with an ongoing focus on
developing capabilities and competence. The participants challenge the flawed expectations of
what it takes for women to access and stay in C-suite-level roles. The prominence of focus on the
lack of readiness for women entering chief-level positions derails attention from what women
need to gain access to C-suites (Doty et al., 2013). The role of gender in leadership has
inadvertently concealed how leadership at C-suites is a unique space where women earn access
through a solid commitment to continuously expanding skill sets, a self-driven motivation to
achieve results, and a passion for making an impact. Gender imbalance in C-suite roles must
focus on closing the gender gap by empowering and building women’s self-efficacy on ways to
90

gain access to once-impenetrable C-suite roles (Sankar, 2021). Therefore, advancement into C-
suites is less about gender and more about mastering exceptional competence, performance, and
interpersonal skills.
Recommendation: Center Leadership on Impact over Gender
Leadership at the C-suite level is about demonstrating impact over gender. The wealth of
research has assiduously dominated leadership discussions around gender-related attributes
without addressing ways to mitigate the underrepresentation of women in leadership (Buzzanell
& Kossek, 2018). Despite women's participation and progression into leadership roles, gender
parity in leadership remains elusive due to a greater focus on gender's impact on leadership. The
emphasis on gendered leadership has masked the need to explore the role of women in
organizations and how they can become more effective leaders (Kemp et al., 2016). Women in
the C-suite reframe their success in reaching elite leadership roles due to their performance and
to the need for women leaders to consider the impact they bring to C-suites and resist the
temptation of presenting gender equality as a premise behind their career aspirations.
Implementation
Implementing the recommendations from this study triggers changes at organization,
leadership, individual, and work system levels. The leadership labyrinth (Carli & Eagly, 2007)
set the framework for examining the problem of gender disparity in C-suites. Following the
findings, a modernistic leadership labyrinth model emerges with an intersecting element of
individual and organizational factors, impacting women’s path to C-suites. The problem of
gender imbalance in C-suites involves an organizational change application focusing on
examining an organization’s ability to respond to changes around leadership, culture,
commitment, and accountability. This study utilizes the Burke-Litwin change model as a data-
91

driven diagnostic tool to assess the impact of change interventions at individual and
organizational levels. Without an effective diagnosis process, organizations lack the necessary
data to initiate and sustain effective change initiatives.
Burke-Litwin Change Model
The findings recommend changes at individual and organizational levels to facilitate
women’s path to C-suites. The Burke-Litwin framework can accommodate a variety of
organizations and change scenarios and provides greater application through its iterative systems
perspective and level of specificity among the twelve factors (French et al., 2022; Spangenberg
& Theron, 2013). To increase the participation of women in C-suites, the Burke-Litwin
framework challenges organizations to examine the necessary changes across different variables,
including strategy, leadership, culture, works systems, and management systems that interact
with individual factors of motivation, task requirements, and individual values and needs.
The distinction between transformational and transactional changes has application to all
stakeholders with different levels of authority and influence over the proposed change initiatives.
The model offers comprehensive and interrelated elements within an organization and how they
affect the recommendations for the change initiatives (McKinzie, 2017; Olivier, 2018). The
dimensions of the change model interact and influence each other within the organization in
response to competing pressures from the wider environment. Organizations must effectively
diagnose, implement, evaluate, and sustain the change process to ensure organizational
effectiveness (Burke & Noumair, 2015). The study concludes that an application of the Burk-
Letwin model provides clarity for organizational diagnosis and change. The model offers
comprehensive and interrelated elements within an organization and how they affect the
recommendations for the change initiatives. Figure 3 highlights the disaggregated
92

recommendations from the previous sections, along with the various factors and individual
elements of the model.
Figure 3 highlights the interrelation between the factors and elements required to
understand and facilitate organizational change (Burke, 2017). The 16 disaggregated
recommendations interwoven within the transformational, transactional, and individual factors
stemming from the qualitative data presented in Chapter Four appear in Table 4, along with the
relevant research question.

Figure 3
Burke-Litwin Change Model

93

Table 4
Table of Recommendations
Element Recommendation
Mission/Strategy Organizations need to create gender-inclusive goals (RQ2).
Leadership Leadership needs to commit to inclusion (RQ2).
Organizational culture Organizations need to allow access to C-suite positions (RQ3).
Organizational culture Organizations need to prioritize gender intelligence (RQ3).
Organizational culture Organizations need to focus on impact (RQ3).
Structure Organizations need to create development opportunities for women (RQ2).
Management practices Organizations need gender-based accountability practices (RQ2).
Management practices Organizations need to mitigate unconscious bias (RQ2).
Systems Organizations need fair performance evaluations (RQ2).
Work Unit Climate Women need to adopt a learning mindset (RQ1).
Work Unit Climate Women need to exploit their performance advantage (RQ1).
Task-Skill Alignment Women need to be self-driven in their development (RQ1).
Motivation Women must possess self-efficacy (RQ1).
Motivation Women must self-promote (RQ1).
Individual Needs/Values Women must make work/life compromises (RQ1).
Individual Needs/Values Women must develop work-related connections (RQ1).

94

External Environment
The drive for exceptional business results justifies access to chief-level roles, regardless
of gender. The findings of this study recommend an organizational change strategy with an
external lever to drive exceptional business results. The application of the Burk-Letwin model
provides clarity for organizational diagnosis and change to enhance gender parity in C-suites
based on women’s impact on financial results. The dimensions of Burke-Litwin change model
interact and affect each other within the organization in response to competing pressures from
the external environment to deliver superior business outcomes. The ability to impact achieving
organizational goals and financial benefits is essential for a successful senior executive (Hurley
& Shumway, 2015).
Most initiatives, legislature, and policies to enhance gender equity in leadership have not
been effective as they advocate for gender equality in leadership. Despite the requirement to
deliver superior business outcomes in C-suites, the focus on the underrepresentation of women in
senior leadership roles persistently centers on claims for social justice and gender equality
(Gabaldon et al., 2017). The findings suggest a more effective strategy in integrating women into
C-suite roles is to highlight their leadership ability to influence, drive, and impact business
results versus their gender.
Transformational Factors
Transformational factors of the Burke-Litwin model align with the study’s
recommendations for organizations to initiate change in leadership, culture, and strategy. Setting
gender-inclusive goals, creating commitment and accountability for achieving gender-inclusion
goals, and creating a culture focusing on gender intelligence and impact on business results
versus gender differences requires dedicated leadership. There is a need to build a commitment
95

from all stakeholders to develop a strong sense of ownership from the design phase to
implementation and evaluation toward gender inclusion in leadership. Organizational culture has
a more substantial impact on the elements of the organizational system than other connections
(Filej et al., 2009).
Transactional Factors
The study proposes changes in organizational transactional factors through setting a
formal structure to provide gender-inclusive development opportunities, establishing an
accountability mechanism through the performance management systems, and the requirement
that leaders develop and implement gender-inclusion development plans. Transactional change
factors in the Burke-Litwin model represent opportunities where managers have a direct impact
with a focus on promoting a continuous improvement of management practices (French et al.,
2022; Olivier, 2018). The transactional factors can help scaffold changes and provide gender-
inclusive work systems and accountability metrics. Although the accountability for gender-
inclusion systems and cultures ultimately reside with the CEO, managers, and leaders across the
organizations must identify and address explicit and implicit gender biases within their sphere of
influence.
Individual Factors
Organizations must be cognizant of how decisions and processes within the
transformational and tractional levels influence the individual level. As this study examined the
leadership labyrinth (Carli & Eagly, 2007) and its application to current challenges facing
women as the navigate their careers toward the C-suite, it is incumbent upon organizations to
understand many of those future women reside within their current organization. It is essential to
effectively develop internal talent as women will readily leave for a different organization or
96

labyrinth that seems to promise a more direct path to the C-suite. The Burke-Litwin model’s
individual-level factors present specific and actionable behaviors, actions, and tasks toward
facilitating a path leading to senior leadership roles (Olivier, 2018).
Future Research
Most literature on women in leadership focuses on organizational and societal barriers
women face in pursuing leadership roles. Research on women in leadership continues to be
inconsistent, disguising a clearer view of how women can successfully reach elite leadership
roles. An area for future research includes investigating women's experiences of being unable to
reach C-suite roles despite their efforts and aspirations. Their narratives will provide valuable
insights into factors limiting their advancement into C-suite roles. A further area for future
research would be a qualitative study of men in CEO roles. The CEOs will be able to provide
valuable insights into the strategies, work-practices, and talent decisions impacting gender
disparity in C-suites. Additionally, as most CEOs are men, their perspectives on the
underrepresentation of women in C-suites will uncover how women can overcome
organizational barriers to gender parity in C-suites. Finally, examining women's narratives in C-
suites in a specific industry. By taking a deeper view of women's experiences in C-suites in a
particular sector, varying themes of obstacles and enablers may emerge.
Conclusion
Propaganda on gender equality is distorting women's chances of advancement into C-
suites. A stubborn paradox remains in organizations where the underrepresentation of women in
C-suites continues despite their experience, performance, and ability to impact business results.
Carli and Eagly (2007) point to prejudice, work/life balance, and gender differences as obstacles
to women's career advancement in elite leadership roles. The overbearing emphasis on obstacles
97

through the leadership path undermines women's confidence, enablement, and control of their
career advancement. Although they must earn their way to the top, this study provides an
inspirational, novel, and transformational framework for women ascending to C-suite roles. The
aggregate findings suggest the problem of gender disparity in leadership needs a renewed
analysis. The experiences of 17 women in C-suites provide valuable insights into the power and
influence women possess to ascend into chief-level roles. The amplification of women as key
drivers of their career growth transforms the narrative from victimhood to enablement,
prompting the emergence of a modern-day leadership labyrinth.
There is no unique recipe for accessing the highest levels of leadership. The building
blocks of the leadership labyrinth for women are self-efficacy, self-advocacy, and self-drive
rather than self-inflicting limitations. Although organizations can help mitigate barriers, women
are the main drivers of their leadership path. The primary enabler of women's career
advancement is not the society, the majority in power, nor the organizations but women
themselves. This study helps empower aspiring women leaders to reframe their role as the
architects of their leadership labyrinth with an awareness of how to circumvent gender
stereotypes, diffuse gender differences, and manage work/life obligations. The notion of
work/life balance becomes mythical with an encouraging message about compromising, coping,
and prioritizing work and family obligations. Nurturing a purposeful network of personal and
professional connections enables thought-sharing, problem-solving, and referrals to
opportunities. Individual factors facilitating women’s path to leadership enable women to take
charge of their career advancement.
In a male-dominated leadership platform where women are often unnoticed, advocating
for themselves becomes a skill to survive and thrive in the leadership journey. This study
98

disrupts and dismantles the walls of misconceptions about women as victims of gendered
stereotypes and unconscious bias, challenging the subliminal messages about gender hindering
women's ability to become influential leaders. The erroneous spotlight on shattering the glass
ceiling versus disabling the function of gender in leadership inadvertently steers research toward
impediments to leadership. Women often fall into the trap of internalized oppression, limiting
their self-efficacy and confidence to drive their leadership journey. The ability to self-advocate
becomes crucial in fostering women's confidence in demonstrating capabilities, highlighting
accomplishments, and seeking opportunities to learn and grow. Although individual factors are
pertinent to women’s ability to access C-suite roles, organizations must equally promote and
nurture gender parity practices.
Organizations must become proactive in cultivating gender parity in leadership. By
fostering a gender-inclusive culture and work systems, organizations acknowledge and take
responsibility for ensuring women have equitable opportunities to career advancement. Gender-
balance leadership teams require organizations to pave the path to gender parity in leadership by
creating awareness around unconscious bias and providing deliberate gender-inclusive
developmental programs for women. The role of the CEO becomes imperative in setting a
strategic agenda and role modeling commitment and accountability in selecting, developing, and
promoting gender-inclusive leadership teams. This study outlines an organization’s role in
ensuring unconscious bias does not influence the recognition and assessment of women's
contributions and performance. Explicit accountability measurements through performance
management systems encourage awareness of how bias and stereotypes impact behavior.
Advocating for gender equality is an intrinsic process in C-suites. Through an
encouraging roadmap, this study suggests women's confidence, tenacity, and impact are drivers
99

of change in overcoming obstacles on the path to chief-level roles. The findings of this study are
potent enablers to inspire the next generation of women to strive and take control of their modern
leadership labyrinth, where they must go beyond leaning in, shattering boundaries, and fixing
leaking pipelines to cultivating a continuous impact on business results. Until we create a space
where women are part of the solution to gender disparity in leadership, we will continue the
strategic mistake of positioning women as victims of their gender. This study's optimistic view
mobilizes a transformative mindset towards women as enablers of their leadership journey,
prompting positive outcomes toward gender parity in C-suites.

100

References
Adams-Prassl, A., Boneva, T., Golin, M., & Rauh, C. (2020). Inequality in the impact of the
coronavirus shock: Evidence from real time surveys. Journal of Public Economics, 189,
104245–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104245
Adapa, S. (2017). Inclusive leadership: Negotiating gendered spaces. Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60666-8
Adjei, A. A., Bajpai, J., Banerjee, S., Berghoff, A. S., Felip, E., Furness, A. J. S., Garassino, M.
C., Garrido, P., Haanen, J., Letsch, A., Linardou, H., Peters, S., Sessa, C., Tabernero, J.,
Tsang, J., & Yang, J., H. (2021). Has COVID-19 had a greater impact on female than
male oncologists? Results of the ESMO Women for Oncology (W4O) Survey. ESMO
Open, 6(3), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100131
Adserias, R. P., Charleston, L. J., & Jackson, J. F. L. (2017). What style of leadership is best
suited to direct organizational change to fuel institutional diversity in higher education?
Race, Ethnicity and Education, 20(3), 315–331.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1260233
Afary, J., & Anderson, K. B. (2023). Woman, life, freedom: The origins of the uprising in Iran.
Dissent, 70(1), 82-98.
Alan, S., Ertac, S., Kubilay, E., & Loranth, G. (2020). Understanding gender differences in
leadership. The Economic Journal (London), 130(626), 263–289.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/uez050
Alarcon, A., Shouman, L., & Vidal-Sune, A. (2022). Impact of work-life balance on firm
innovativeness: The different strategies used by male and female bosses. Administrative
Sciences, 12(3), 115–. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci12030115
101

Almack, K., Bristowe, K., Harding, R., Hodson, M., Johnson, K., Koffman, J., McEnhill, L.,
Wee, B., & (2018). Recommendations to reduce inequalities for LGBT people facing
advanced illness: ACCESSCare national qualitative interview study. Palliative Medicine,
32(1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216317705102
Alon, T., Coskun, S., Doepke, M., Koll, D., & Tertilt, M. (2022). From mancession to
shecession: Women’s employment in regular and pandemic recessions. NBER
Macroeconomics Annual, 36(1), 83–151. https://doi.org/10.1086/718660
Alphonso, A., Baber, A., Waymon, L., & Wylde, J. (2015). Strategic connections: the new face
of networking in a collaborative world (1st edition). American Management Association.
Alvarez-Huerta, P., Larrea, I., & Muela, A. (2022). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy among first-
year undergraduates: Gender, creative self-efficacy, leadership self-efficacy, and field of
study. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review,10(4), 73–90.
https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2022.100405
Amoros-Martinez, A., Cavero-Rubio, J. A., & Collazo-Mazon, A. (2019). Public recognition of
gender equality in the workplace and its influence on firms’ performance. Women’s
Studies International Forum, 76, 102273–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2019.102273
Anawati, A., & Verma, S. (2021). Commentary: Moral and ethical leadership in the age of
diversity, equity, inclusiveness and social accountability. Healthcare Quarterly (Toronto,
Ont.), 24(3), 18–22. https://doi.org/10.12927/hcq.2021.26624
Anderson, E. M., Calarco, J. M., Knopf, A. S., & Meanwell, E. (2021). By default: How mothers
in different-sex dual-earner couples account for inequalities in pandemic parenting.
Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 7, 237802312110387–.
https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211038783
102

Anderzen-Carlsson, A., Appelros, P., Arvidsson-Lindvall, M., & Forsberg, A. (2021). "I can
manage the challenge" - a qualitative study describing experiences of living with balance
limitations after a first-ever stroke. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health
and Well-Being, 16(1), 1857044–1857044.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2020.1857044
Andrade, M. S., & Madsen, S. R. (2018). Unconscious gender bias: Implications for women’s
leadership development. Journal of Leadership Studies (Hoboken, N.J.), 12(1), 62–67.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21566
Annis, B., & Nesbitt, R. (2017). Results at the top: using gender intelligence to create
breakthrough growth (1st ed.). Wiley.
Aparisi-Torrijo, S. & Ribes-Giner, G. (2022). Female entrepreneurial leadership factors.
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 18(4), 1707–1737.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-022-00798-2
Archibald, M. M., Ambagtsheer, R. C., Casey, M. G., & Lawless, M. (2019). Using Zoom
videoconferencing for qualitative data collection: Perceptions and experiences of
researchers and participants. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18,
160940691987459–. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919874596
Arnold, K. A., Carleton, E. L., Hancock, A. J., & Walsh, M. M. (2022). Mindfulness and
stereotype threat in social media: unexpected effects for women’s leadership aspirations.
Gender in Management, 37(4), 535–548. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-11-2020-0341
Arvidsson-Lindvall, M., Forsberg, A., Appelros, P., & Anderzén-Carlsson, A. (2021). “I can
manage the challenge” - a qualitative study describing experiences of living with balance
limitations after first-ever stroke. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health
103

and Well-Being, 16(1), 1857044–1857044.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2020.1857044
Ashikali, T., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2021). The role of inclusive leadership in supporting
an inclusive climate in diverse public sector teams. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 41(3), 497–519. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X19899722
Aungsuroch, Y., Gunawan, J., Marzilli, C., (2022). Online “chatting” interviews: An acceptable
method for qualitative data collection. Belitung Nursing Journal, 8(4), 277–279.
https://doi.org/10.33546/bnj.2252
Baba, V. V., Tourigny, C., Han, J., & (2017). Does gender matter? Gender in Management,
32(8), 554–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-05-2016-0106
Badura, K. L., Grijalva, E., Newman, D. A., Yan, T. T., & Jeon, G. (2018). Gender and
leadership emergence: A meta‐analysis and explanatory model. Personnel Psychology,
71(3), 335–367. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12266
Bajaba, S., Fuller, B., Liu, Y., Marler, L. E., & Pratt, J. (2018). Examining how the personality,
self-efficacy, and anticipatory cognitions of potential entrepreneurs shape their
entrepreneurial intentions. Personality and Individual Differences, 125, 120–125.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.005
Balcom, S. A., Gupta, N., & Singh, P. (2023). Looking beyond parity: Gender wage gaps and the
leadership labyrinth in the Canadian healthcare management workforce. Healthcare
Management Forum, 36(1), 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/08404704221104435
Balushkina, T., Netchaeva, E., & Sheppard, L. D. (2022). A meta-analytic review of the gender
difference in leadership aspirations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 137, 103744–.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2022.103744
104

Bandura, A. (2007). Much ado over a faulty conception of perceived self-efficacy grounded in
faulty experimentation. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26(6), 641–658.
https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2007.26.6.641
Barth, S. E., Grand, J.A., Levine, B. R., Samuelson, H. L., Wessel, J. L. (2019). Exploring
women’s leadership labyrinth: Effects of hiring and developmental opportunities on
gender stratification. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(6), 101314–.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101314
Bayingana, A. U., Binagwaho, A., Mathewos, K., & Yohannes, T. (2021). Commitment to
gender equality through gender sensitive financing. BMJ Global Health, 6(7), e006747–.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006747
Beeri, O., Cohen, A., & Moor, A., (2015). In quest of excellence, not power: Women’s paths to
positions of influence and leadership. Advancing Women in Leadership, 35, 1–.
Begum, N., Begum, S., Rustam, A., & Rustam, S. (2018). Gender perspectives of
transformational leadership style and leadership effectiveness: A case study of Pakistan
and Turkey. Dialogue (Dera Ismāīl Khān, Pakistan), 13(2), 211–.
Beidollahkhani, A. (2022). Discourse formation of political dissents via Twitter: Political
sociology of the subversion discourse in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Sociological
Research Online, 27(4), 1020–1039. https://doi.org/10.1177/13607804221122462
Bejarano, C., Brown, N. E., Montoya, C. M., & Gershon, S. A. (2022). The intersectional
dynamics of descriptive representation. Politics & Gender, 18(2), 483–512.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X20000744
105

Bekk, M., Brosi, P., Molders, S., Sporrle, M., & Welpe, I. M. (2018). Support for quotas for
women in leadership: The influence of gender stereotypes. Human Resource
Management, 57(4), 869–882. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21882
Bekker, L. G., Coe, I. R., & Wiley, R. (2019). Organisational best practices towards gender
equality in science and medicine. The Lancet (British Edition), 393(10171), 587–593.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33188-X
Bell, C. N., Leider, J. P., & Owens-Young, J. L. (2023). Public health workforce perceptions
about organizational commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion: Results from PH
WINS 2021. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 29(Suppl 1), S98–
S106. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000001633
Bell, C. N., Leider, J. P., & Owens-Young, J. L. (2023). Public health workforce perceptions
about organizational commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion: Results from PH
WINS 2021. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 29(Suppl 1), S98–
S106. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000001633
Bembenutty, H. & Herndon, S.J. (2017). Self-regulation of learning and performance among
students enrolled in a disciplinary alternative school. Personality and Individual
Differences, 104, 266–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.08.027
Berger, M.T. & Radeloff, C. (2021). Transforming scholarship: Why women’s and gender
studies students are changing themselves and the world. Taylor & Francis Group.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315097985
Bertrand, M. (2018). Coase lecture – The glass ceiling. Economica (London), 85(338), 205–231.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.12264
106

Bhembe, X. J., Burstin, H. R., Cansino, C., Khanna, K., Overholser, B., & Spector, N. D. (2021).
The path forward: Using metrics to promote equitable work environments. Pediatrics
(Evanston), 148(Suppl 2), 1–. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-051440G
Bierema, L. L. (2016). Women’s leadership: Troubling notions of the “ideal” (male) leader.
Advances in Developing Human Resources, 18(2), 119–136.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422316641398
Bilimoria, D., Hopkins, M. M., O’Neil, D. A., & Van Esch, C. (2018). How perceived riskiness
influences the selection of women and men as senior leaders. Human Resource
Management, 57(4), 915–930. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21902
Billups, F. D. (2020). Qualitative data collection tools: design, development, and applications
(Vol. 55). SAGE Publications, Incorporated. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878699
Blaney, J. M. (2020). Gender and leadership development in undergraduate computing: a closer
look at women’s leadership conceptions. Computer Science Education, 30(4), 469–499.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2020.1816769
Bloomberg, L. D., & Volpe, M. (2019). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A roadmap
from beginning to end. In Completing Your Qualitative Dissertation: A Roadmap from
Beginning to End. SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452226613
Blundell, R., Costa Dias, M., Joyce, R., & Xu, X. (2020). COVID‐19 and inequalities. Fiscal
Studies, 41(2), 291–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-5890.12232
Bond, K. D., Collins, P. H., Da Silva, E. C. G., Ergun, E., Furseth, I., & Martinez-Palacios, J.
(2021). Intersectionality as critical social theory: Intersectionality as critical social theory,
Patricia Hill Collins, Duke University Press, 2019. Contemporary Political Theory,
20(3), 690–725. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-021-00490-0
107

Boomgaarden, H. G., Eisele, O., Escalante-Block, E., & Kluknavská, A. (2022). The politicising
spark? Exploring the impact of #MeToo on the gender equality discourse in Australian
print media. Australian Journal of Political Science, 57(4), 309–327.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2022.2045900
Branam, A. C., Burke, T. L., Eagly, A. H., Forbes Berthoud, D. A., Fritz, J. H., Holba, A. M.,
Laff, N. S., Payseur, E. L., Ruminski, E. L., & Whalen, S. A. (2012). Communicative
understandings of women’s leadership development: From ceilings of glass to labyrinth
paths (pp. xiv–xiv). Lexington Books.
Brandt, T. M., & Edinger, P. (2015). Transformational leadership in teams – the effects of a team
leader’s sex and personality. Gender in Management, 30(1), 44–68.
https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-08-2013-0100
Braun, S., Frey, D., Hentschel, T., & Peus, C., (2018). The communality-bonus effect for male
transformational leaders - leadership style, gender, and promotability. European Journal
of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27(1), 112–125.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2017.1402759
Brue, K. (2018). Harmony and help: Recognizing the impact of work-life balance for women
leaders. Journal of Leadership Education, 17(4), 219–243.
https://doi.org/10.12806/V17/I4/C2
Bukamal, H. (2022). Deconstructing insider–outsider researcher positionality. British Journal of
Special Education, 49(3), 327–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12426
Bullough, A., Guelich, U., Manolova, T. S., & Schjoedt, L. (2022). Women’s entrepreneurship
and culture: Gender role expectations and identities, societal culture, and the
108

entrepreneurial environment. Small Business Economics, 58(2), 985–996.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00429-6
Burdfield-Steel, E., Heap, S. M., Potvin, D. A., & Potvin, J. M. (2018). Diversity begets
diversity: A global perspective on gender equality in scientific society leadership. PloS
One, 13(5), e0197280–e0197280. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197280
Burke, W. W., Catenacci, L. T., Gipson, A. N., Mendelsohn, D. B., & Pfaff, D. L. (2017).
Women and leadership: selection, development, leadership style, and performance. The
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53(1), 32–65.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886316687247
Burton, l. J., & Weiner, J. M. (2016). “They were really looking for a male leader for the
building”: Gender, identity and leadership development in a principal preparation
program. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 141–141. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00141
Bussemakers, C., Kraaykamp, G., Spierings, N., & Van Oosterhout, K. (2017). Women’s
worldwide education–employment connection: A multilevel analysis of the moderating
impact of economic, political, and cultural contexts. World Development, 99, 28–41.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.07.002
Buzzanell, P. M. & Kossek, E. E. (2018). Women’s career equality and leadership in
organizations: Creating an evidence‐based positive change. Human Resource
Management, 57(4), 813–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21936
Byars-Winston, A., Ellinas, E., Fouad, N. A., Kaljo, K., Patitucci, T. N., & Novalija, J. (2019).
No room to “lean in”: A qualitative study on gendered barriers to promotion and
leadership. Journal of Women’s Health (Larchmont, N.Y. 2002), 28(3), 393–402.
https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2018.7252
109

Cajner, T. Crane, L. D., Decker, R. A., Grigsby, J., Hamins-Puertolas, A., Hurst, E., Kurz, C., &
Yildirmaz, A. (2020). The US labor market during the beginning of the pandemic
recession. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2020(2), 3–34.
https://doi.org/10.1353/eca.2020.0005
Callan, V. J., Fitzsimmons, T. W., & Paulsen, N. (2014). Gender disparity in the C-suite: Do
male and female CEOs differ in how they reached the top? The Leadership Quarterly,
25(2), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.08.005
Cannizzo, F., & Strong, C. (2020). “Put some balls on that woman”: Gendered repertoires of
inequality in screen composers’ careers. Gender, Work, and Organization, 27(6), 1346–
1360. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12496
Cardona Lopez, J. A., Gaini, F., Heikkinen, M., & Nordfjell, O. B. (2018). Promising Nordic
practices in gender equality promotion: Developing teacher education dialogue, practice,
and policy cycles on-line. Policy Futures in Education, 16(5), 605–619.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210317722286
Carli, L. L. (2020). Women, gender equality and COVID-19. Gender in Management, 35(7/8),
647–655. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-07-2020-0236
Carli, L. L., & Eagly, A. H. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business
Review, 85(9), 62–146.
https://uosc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01USC_INST/273cgt/cdi_webofscience
_primary_000249074300016CitationCount
Carli, l. L., & Eagly, A. H. (2016). Women face a labyrinth: an examination of metaphors for
women leaders. Gender in Management, 31(8), 514–527. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-02-
2015-0007
110

Catalyst. (2022). Quick take: Women in the workforce—Global. Retrieved from
https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-theworkforce-global/
Catalyst. (2023). Women of Color in the United States. Retrieved from
https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-of-color-in-the-united-states/
Cenek, J. (2020). Gender stereotypes in organizations. Journal of Education, Culture and
Society, 4(1), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.15503/jecs20131.30.37
Chakroun, H., Chtioui, T., Nekhili, M. (2018). women’s leadership and firm performance: family
versus nonfamily firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(2), 291–316.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3340-2
Chance, N. L. (2022). Resilient leadership: A phenomenological exploration into how black
women in higher education leadership navigate cultural adversity. The Journal of
Humanistic Psychology, 62(1), 44–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221678211003000
Chen, J. K. & Sriphon, T. (2021). Perspective on COVID-19 pandemic factors impacting
organizational leadership. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 13(6), 3230–.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063230
Chen, S.-C., & Shao, J. (2022). Feminine traits improve transformational leadership advantage:
investigation of leaders’ gender traits, sex, and their joint impacts on employee contextual
performance. Gender in Management, 37(5), 569–586. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-06-
2020-0167
Cho, J. (2018). Evaluating qualitative research. Oxford University Press.
Choi, S., de Souza, N. M. F., Lind, A., Parashar, S., Prugl, E., & Zalewski, M. (2022). “Woman,
life, freedom.” International Feminist Journal of Politics, 24(5), 671–674.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14616742.2022.2140271
111

Clark, J., & Dhatt, R. (2022). Backsliding in gender equality: a reminder that progress is a
constant struggle. BMJ (Online), 379, o2469–o2469. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o2469
Coetzee, M., & Moosa, M. (2020). Leadership contingencies in the retention of women in higher
education. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(14), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v18i0.1326
Cohen, J. R., Dalton, D. W., Holder-Webb, L. L., & McMillan, J. J. (2020). An analysis of glass
ceiling perceptions in the accounting profession. Journal of Business Ethics, 164(1), 17–
38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4054-4
Colby, S., & Salinas, T. M. (2021). Intentional leadership development programming for
advancing women leaders. The Journal of Faculty Development, 35(1), 27–33.
Collins, P. H., (2019). Intersectionality as critical social theory. Duke University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9781478007098
Cook, S. (2022). Effective career development: Advice for establishing an enjoyable career. IT
Governance Publishing.
Coruzzi, C. P. (2020). Leading change with intelligence: The power of diagnosis in creating
organizational renewal. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(4), 420–436.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886320953982
Cozza, B., & Parnther, C. (2022). Voices from women leaders on success in higher education:
pipelines, pathways, and promotion. Taylor and Francis.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003219897
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
112

Crisp, R. J., Hogg, M. A., & Rast, Gaffney, A. M. (2012). Leadership under uncertainty: When
leaders who are non-prototypical group members can gain support. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 48(3), 646–653.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.12.013
Crone, T., de Graaf, K., Johnson, E., Nyambura, C., & Stevenson, J. (2018). WhatWomenWant:
A new accountability paradigm and expanded accountability mechanisms through
leveraging social media, catalysing movements, and building leadership. Agenda
(Durban), 32(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10130950.2018.1427707
Dang, H. H., & Viet Nguyen, C. (2021). Gender inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic:
Income, expenditure, savings, and job loss. World Development, 140, 105296–105296.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105296
Debebe, G. (2019). Women’s leadership development. Routledge.
DeFrank-Cole, L., & Tan, S. (2019). Women’s leadership journeys: stories, research, and novel
perspectives (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351209359
Del Carmen Triana, M. & Yang, T. (2019). Set up to fail: Explaining when women-led
businesses are more likely to fail. Journal of Management, 45(3), 926–954.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316685856
Denny, E. & Weckesser, A. (2022). How to do qualitative research? Qualitative research
methods. BJOG: an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 129(7), 1166–
1167. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17150
Denzin, N. K., & Giardina, M. D. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and the politics of evidence. Taylor
and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315421414
113

Diehl, A. B., & Dzubinski, L. M. (2016). Making the invisible visible: A cross‐sector analysis of
gender‐based leadership barriers. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 27(2), 181–
206. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21248
Diekman, A. B., & Joshi, M. P. (2022). My Fair Lady? Inferring organizational trust from the
mere presence of women in leadership roles. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin,
48(8), 1220–1237. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211035957
Dilli, S., & Westerhuis, G. (2018). How institutions and gender differences in education shape
entrepreneurial activity: A cross-national perspective. Small Business Economics, 51(2),
371–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0004-x
Dimitrios, T., & Antigoni, F. (2018). Ethics and deontology in nursing research: A discussion
paper. International Journal of Caring Sciences, 11(3), 1982–1989.
Doering, S. (2023). Smart career moves for smart women: How to succeed in career transitions.
Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003353720
Dooley, M., Durik, A. M., & Lindeman, M. I. (2019). Women and self-promotion: a test of three
theories. Psychological Reports, 122(1), 219–230.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118755096
Doty, L., Helitzer, D. L., & Travis, E. (2013). Sponsorship: A path to the academic medicine c-
suite for women faculty? Academic Medicine, 88(10), 1414–1417.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a35456
Durik, A. M., Dooley, M., & Lindeman, M. I., (2019). Women and self-promotion: A test of
three theories. Psychological Reports, 122(1), 219–230.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118755096
114

Dwyer, L. P., (2019). Leadership self-efficacy: review and leader development implications. The
Journal of Management Development, 38(8), 637–650. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-03-
2019-0073
Eagly, A. H. & Carli, L. L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business
Review, 85(9), 62–146.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2013). The nature-nurture debates: 25 years of challenges in
understanding the psychology of gender. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3),
340–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613484767
Eibl, B., Lang, F. R., & Niessen, C. (2020). Employee voice at work: the role of employees’
gender, self-efficacy beliefs, and leadership. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 29(4), 570–585.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2020.1733979
Elliott, I., Meagher, K., & Patel, P. (2022). Gender and leadership in conflict settings. Bulletin of
the World Health Organization, 100(1), 3–3A. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.21.287528
Erhart, I., Eslen-Ziya, H., Jenzen, O., Korkut, U., & McGarry, A. (2021). The symbol of social
media in contemporary protest: Twitter and the Gezi Park movement. Convergence
(London, England), 27(2), 414–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856520933747
Farrugia, B. (2019). WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): Sampling in qualitative research. Early
Human Development, 133, 69–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2019.03.016
Fernandez Romero, D., Fileborn, B., Loney-Howes, R., Mendes, K. & Nunez-Puente, S. (2021).
“Digital footprints of #MeToo.” Feminist Media Studies.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2021.1886142
115

Fileborn, B. & Loney-Howes, R. (2019). MeToo and the politics of social change. Springer
International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15213-0
Filej, B., Hudorovic, N., Skela-Savic, B., & Vicic, V. H. (2009). Necessary organizational
changes according to Burke–Litwin model in the head nurse’s system of management in
healthcare and social welfare institutions-The Slovenia experience. Health Policy
(Amsterdam), 90(2), 166–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2008.09.013
Fine, C., Sojo, V., & Lawford‐Smith, H. (2020). Why does workplace gender diversity matter?
Justice, organizational benefits, and policy. Social Issues and Policy Review, 14(1), 36–
72. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12064
Fischbach, A., Horstmann, N., & Lichtenthaler, P. W. (2015). Leadership and gender
stereotyping of emotions: Think manager - think male? Journal of Personnel Psychology,
14(3), 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000136
Flabbi, L., Macis, M., Moro, A., & Schivardi, F. (2019). Do female executives make a
difference? The impact of female leadership on gender gaps and firm performance. The
Economic Journal (London),129(622), 2390–2423. https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/uez012
Fraiman, S. (2018). Sara Ahmed. Living a feminist life. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press,
2017. 299 pp. Critical Inquiry, 44(4), 798–800. https://doi.org/10.1086/698177
French, R., Imms, W., Kvan, T., & Mahat, M. (2022). Viewing the transition to innovative
learning environments through the lens of the Burke-Litwin model for organizational
performance and change. Journal of Educational Change, 23(1), 115–130.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09431-5
116

Fuller, K., Moorosi, P., & Reilly, E. (2018). Leadership and intersectionality: Constructions of
successful leadership among Black women school principals in three different contexts.
Management in Education, 32(4), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020618791006
Gabaldon, P., Mensi-Klarbach, H., & Seierstad, C. (2017). Gender diversity in the boardroom:
volume 2: Multiple approaches beyond quotas (Vol. 2). Springer International
Publishing.
Gill, R., & Orgad, S. (2018). The shifting terrain of sex and power: From the “sexualization of
culture” to #MeToo. Sexualities, 21(8), 1313–1324.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460718794647
Gilley, A., Hall, A., & Holt, S. (2018). Essential components of leadership development
programs. Journal of Managerial Issues, 30(2), 214–229.
Gillian, D. (2021). Gender bias in organisations: From the arts to individualised coaching.
Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003018117
Gorska, R. (2023). The interconnectedness of the level of education and gender equality in
selected countries. Economics and Business, 37(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.2478/eb-
2023-0001
Greiff, S., Li, H., & Tong, T. (2019). Human capital and leadership: the impact of cognitive and
noncognitive abilities. Applied Economics, 51(53), 5741–5752.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1619022
Grotto, A. R., & Lyness, K. (2018). Women and leadership in the United States: Are we closing
the gender gap? Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational
Behavior, 5(1), 227–265. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104739
117

Heilman, M., Hentschel, T., & Peus, C. V. (2019). The multiple dimensions of gender
stereotypes: A current look at men’s and women’s characterizations of others and
themselves. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 11–11.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00011
Hirschi, A. & Koen, J. (2021). Contemporary career orientations and career self-management: A
review and integration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 126, 103505–.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103505
Hoang, T., Sabharwal, M., & Suh, J. (2022). Beyond a numbers game? Impact of diversity and
inclusion on the perception of organizational justice. Public Administration Review,
82(3), 537–555. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13463
Hoobler, J. M., Masterson, C. R., Nkomo, S. M., & Michel, E. J. (2018). The business case for
women leaders: Meta-analysis, research critique, and path forward. Journal of
Management, 44(6), 2473–2499. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316628643
Hoyt, C. L., & Murphy, S. E. (2016). Managing to clear the air: Stereotype threat, women, and
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 387–399.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.11.002
Hurley, k. & Shumway, P. (2015). Real women, real leaders: Surviving and succeeding in the
business world (1st ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119207573
Hymowitz, C. & Schellhardt, T. D. (1986). The corporate woman (a special report): cover --- the
glass ceiling: Why women can’t seem to break the invisible barrier that blocks them from
the top jobs. The Wall Street Journal. Eastern Edition.
118

Jacobson, D., & Mustafa, N. (2019). Social identity map: A reflexivity tool for practicing explicit
positionality in critical qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
18, 160940691987007–. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919870075
Javadian, G., & Zoogah, D. B. (2014). Toward a comprehensive understanding of stereotype
vulnerability and stereotype reactance in organizational settings: The contribution of
relative deprivation theory. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(3), 403–408.
https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12168
Jay, J. K., & Morgan, H. J. (2016). Strategies for women in leadership to advance their careers.
Employment Relations Today, 43(3), 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1002/ert.21569
Johnson, J. M. (2022). The woman suffrage movement in the United States. Taylor & Francis
Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003042808
Kalokerinos, E. K., Von Hippel, & Zacher, H. (2017). Stereotype threat and perceptions of
family-friendly policies among female employees. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 2043–
2043. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02043
Kark, R., Waismel-Manor, R., & Shamir, B. (2012). Does valuing androgyny and femininity lead
to a female advantage? The relationship between gender-role, transformational leadership
and identification. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 620–640.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.12.012
Kemp, L., Ortenblad, A., Putnam, L., & Trehan, K. (2016). “Trapped” by metaphors for
organizations: Thinking and seeing women’s equality and inequality. Human Relations
(New York), 69(4), 975–1000. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715621612
Khalid, S., & Sekiguchi, T. (2019). The mediating effect of glass ceiling beliefs in the
relationship between women’s personality traits and their subjective career success. NTU
119

Management Review, 29(3), 193–220.
https://doi.org/10.6226/NTUMR.201912_29(3).0006
Klenke, K. (2017). Women in leadership: Contextual dynamics and boundaries, second edition.
Emerald Publishing Limited.
Kokkonen, A. & Wangnerud, L. (2017). Women’s presence in politics and male politicians’
commitment to gender equality in politics: Evidence from 290 Swedish local councils.
Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 38(2), 199–220.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2016.1219582
Kossek, E. E., & Lee, K.-H. (2020). Creating gender-inclusive organization: lessons from
research and practice (E. E. Kossek & K.-H. Lee, Eds.). University of Toronto Press.
Kruger, M. & Nel, H. (2019). The development of women and young professionals in STEM
careers: tips and tricks (1st ed.). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429322976
Kubu, C. S. (2018). Who does she think she is? Women, leadership, and the “B” (ias) word.
Clinical Neuropsychologist, 32(2), 235–251.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2017.1418022
Le, B. P. (2021). Academic library leadership: Race and gender. International Journal of
Librarianship, 6(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.23974/ijol.2021.vol6.1.184
Lipton, B. (2017). Writing through the labyrinth: Using l’ecriture feminine in leadership studies.
Leadership (London, England), 13(1), 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715015619969
Lucia, C., & Padgett, M. (2021). Passage through the leadership labyrinth: Women’s journey in
the collegiate recreation profession. Recreational Sports Journal, 45(2), 104–116.
https://doi.org/10.1177/15588661211024315
120

Lyness, K., & Grotto, A. R. (2018). Women and leadership in the United States: Are we closing
the gender gap? Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational
Behavior, 5(1), 227–265. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104739
Madsen, S. R. (2015). Why do we need more women leaders in Utah? Research & Policy Brief,
Utah Women & Leadership project.
Mann, R. & Warr, D. (2017). Using metaphor and montage to analyse and synthesise diverse
qualitative data: exploring the local worlds of “early school leavers.” International
Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(6), 547–558.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1242316
Marcus, B. (2015). The politics of promotion: how high-achieving women get ahead and stay
ahead (1st ed.). WILEY.
https://uosc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01USC_INST/273cgt/cdi_skillsoft_book
s24x7_bkb00082559
Marques, H. (2017). The routineness of tasks, gender, and culture in entrepreneurship. Socio-
Economic Review, 15(4), 815–851. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwx017
Marques J. (2021). Exploring gender at work: multiple perspectives. Springer International
Publishing AG.
Matos, Y., Greene, S., & Sanbonmatsu, K. (2021). Trends: Do women seek “women of color”
for public office? exploring women’s support for electing women of color. Political
Research Quarterly, 74(2), 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912920971793
McDonagh, K. J., & Paris, N. M. (2012). The leadership labyrinth: career advancement for
women. Frontiers of Health Services Management, 28(4), 22–28.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01974520-201204000-00004
121

McGowan, R. A., & Stamper, C. L. (2022). Furthering the metaphor of the leadership labyrinth:
Different paths for different people. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,
29(4), 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1177/154805182211106063
Mella, P. (2022). In every organization, gender stereotypes reduce organizational efficiency and
waste productive energy: A systems thinking perspective. Kybernetes, 51(13), 156–185.
https://doi.org/10.1108/K-04-2021-0283
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: a guide to design and
implementation (4th ed). Wiley.
Nash, M., & Moore, R. (2021). “When I look in the bathroom mirror, I see all the women
standing behind me”: An evaluation of a leadership development program for women in
STEMM. Journal of Sociology (Melbourne, Vic.), 57(2), 362–379.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783320911453
National Women’s Law Center (2020), “COVID-19 job day reports, Workplace Justice”:
https://nwlc.org/resource/2020-jobs-day-reports/
Nwakanma, A. P. (2022). From black lives matter to EndSARS: Women’s socio-political power
and the transnational movement for black lives. Perspectives on Politics, 20(4), 1246–
1259. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592722000019
Odate, K. & Parmar, R. S. (2021). Addressing the detrimental impacts of COVID-19 on women
in the workforce: Where do we go from here? International Journal of Business &
Economic Development, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.24052/IJBED/V09N02/ART-04
Olivier, B. (2018). Psychometric validation of an organizational performance questionnaire
(OPQ) based on the Burke-Litwin model. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 28(1), 46–51.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2017.1409479
122

Parkhurst, J. (2017). Mitigating evidentiary bias in planning and policymaking: Comment on
“reflective practice: How the world bank explored its own biases?” International Journal
of Health Policy and Management, 6(2), 103–105.
https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.96
Peterson, K. (2017). Time Magazine names #metoo movement as 2017 Person of the Year.
University Wire.
https://uosc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01USC_INST/273cgt/cdi_proquest_wire
feeds_1973702371
Phipps, S. T., & Prieto, L. C. (2021). Leaning in: A historical perspective on influencing
women’s leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 173(2), 245–259.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04566-6
Pourmokhtari, N. (2022). Presence-as-resistance: Feminist activism and the politics of social
contestation in Iran. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 24(7), 1–14.
https://uosc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01USC_INST/273cgt/cdi_proquest_jour
nals_2737746894
Pullen, A., & Vachhani, S. J. (2019). Ethics, politics, and feminist organizing: Writing feminist
infrapolitics and affective solidarity into everyday sexism. Human Relations (New York),
72(1), 23–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718780988
Purcell, J. W., Ring, K. A., Rodriguez, & D. X. (2022). The Covid shift: Working women’s
punctuated equilibrium. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 43(8), 1217–
1233. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-01-2022-0044
Quffa, W. A. (2016). A review of the history of gender equality in the United States of America.
Social Sciences and Education Research Review, 3(2), 143–149.
123

Rafiq, A., Saleem, S., & Yusaf, S. (2017). Investigating the glass ceiling phenomenon: An
empirical study of glass ceiling’s effects on selection-promotion and female
effectiveness. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 6(3), 297–.
https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-04-2016-0028
Rahbari, L. (2021). In her shoes: Transnational digital solidarity with muslim women, or the
hijab? Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, 112(2), 107–120.
https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12376
Richards, J.C., & Roth, W. M. (2019). Empowering students as self-directed learners of
qualitative research methods: Transformational practices for instructors and students.
BRILL.
Robertson, R. W. & Tasso Eira de Aquino, C. (2017). Diversity and inclusion in the global
workplace: Aligning initiatives with strategic business goals. Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54993-4
Roth, W. M. & Von-Unger, H. (2018). Current perspectives on research ethics in qualitative
research. Forum, Qualitative Social Research, 19(3). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-
19.3.3155
Rouhi, M. (2022). Woman, Life, Freedom in Iran. Survival (London), 64(6), 189–196.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2022.2150441
Ryan, M. K. (2023). Addressing workplace gender inequality: Using the evidence to avoid
common pitfalls. British Journal of Social Psychology, 62(1), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12606
Saba, J., (2017). Corporate America’s Gender Gap: Few Women in the C-Suite. The New York
Times.
124

Sanchez, C. M., & Lehnert, K. (2019). The unbearable heaviness of leadership: The effects of
competency, negatives, and experience on women’s aspirations to leadership. Journal of
Business Research, 95, 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.033
Sankar, C. (2021). No explanation required!: A woman’s guide to assert your confidence and
communicate to win at work. McGraw-Hill.
Shalini, R. & Singh, R. (2020). Leading organizational development and change: Principles and
contextual perspectives. Springer Nature.
Sheppard, L. D. (2018). Gender differences in leadership aspirations and job and life attribute
preferences among U.S. undergraduate students. Sex Roles, 79(9-10), 565–577.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0890-4
Smith, S., J., & Sinkford, J. C. (2022). Gender equality in the 21st century: Overcoming barriers
to women’s leadership in global health. Journal of Dental Education, 86(9), 1144–1173.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.13059
Stamper, C. L., & McGowan, R. A. (2022). Furthering the metaphor of the leadership labyrinth:
Different paths for different people. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,
29(4), 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1177/154805182211106063
Starr, K., & Toffoletti, K. (2016). Women academics and work-life balance: Gendered
discourses of work and care. Gender, Work, and Organization, 23(5), 489–504.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12133
Stone, K. B. (2015). Burke-Litwin organizational assessment survey: Reliability and validity.
Organization Development Journal, 33(2), 33–50.
125

Storer, H. & Rodriguez, M. (2020). Mapping a movement: social media, feminist hashtags, and
movement building in the digital age. Journal of Community Practice, 28(2), 160–176.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2020.1757541
Tate, G., & Yang, L. (2015). Female leadership and gender equity: Evidence from plant closure.
Journal of Financial Economics, 117(1), 77–97.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2014.01.004
The female fightback: Developing women for senior leadership roles. (2021). Development and
Learning in Organizations, 35(3), 28–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-05-2020-0116
Tran, T., & Tuzemen, D., (2020). The uneven recovery in the prime-age labor force
participation. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Economic Review, 104(3), pp. 21-41.
Varga-Atkins, T., & O’Brien, M. (2009). From drawings to diagrams: maintaining researcher
control during graphic elicitation in qualitative interviews. International Journal of
Research & Method in Education, 32(1), 53–67.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270902759998
Weatherall, R. (2020). Even when those struggles are not our own: Storytelling and solidarity in
a feminist social justice organization. Gender, Work, and Organization, 27(4), 471–486.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12386
Wright, M. C. (2021). Developing leadership skills in women: A call for collaboration.
Organization Development Journal, 39(4), 9–20.
Yang, T., & del Carmen Triana, M. (2019). Set up to fail: Explaining when women-led
businesses are more likely to fail. Journal of Management, 45(3), 926–954.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316685856

126

Appendix A: Recruitment Email
Dear [participant]
I hope this email finds you well.
I am pursuing a Doctor of Education in Organizational Change and Leadership at USC.
For my dissertation, I have chosen the problem of underrepresentation of women in C-suite roles
in Fortune 500 companies. To that end, I am looking to interview women for my research study
who have successfully reached C-suite positions so I can examine ways they have overcome
challenges and obstacles on their leadership journey, while many women have not. USC will
publish my research upon completion.
This will be a very rewarding experience for these participants as they will be helping
pave the path for the next generation of women leaders!
I am hoping that I can connect with women in C-suite roles that have gained access to
chief-level roles. At this stage, I am looking to identify and meet the participants for my study
before the official interview process.
I look forward to hearing back from you. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Nely Gamini
Doctoral candidate
USC School of Education

127

Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Research Questions
1. What individual factors facilitated women’s path to C-suite roles?
2. What organizational factors facilitated women’s path to C-suite roles?
3. What is the current state of the leadership labyrinth for mitigating the challenges
for women pursuing C-suite roles?
Respondent Type
Women in C-suite roles across a different range of industries.
Introduction to the Interview
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. As I mentioned before, the interview
should take about an hour, does that still work for you? Before we start, I want to provide you
with an overview of my study and answer any questions you might have about participating in
this interview. I am a doctoral student at USC, Rossier School of Education, and I am
researching gender disparity in C-suite roles across various industries. My study examines
factors hindering gender balance in leadership and how we can mitigate them. Please know my
questions are for evaluative purposes only and are not meant to be a judgment of you. This
interview is also, so I will not share them with any other person. If you are interested, I am happy
to provide you with a copy of my final paper. I will keep the data in a password-protected
computer, and after twelve months, I will erase all data. I have chosen Zoom as the means of our
meeting, and I will be recording our discussions so I can focus on your responses versus taking
notes. The recording is solely to capture your perspectives, and I will not share them with anyone
else. May I have your permission to record our conversation? Do you have any questions about
this study before we start?
128

Table B1
Interview Protocol
Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed
Key concepts
addressed
1. Can you give me an
example of your
experience with bias
at work?
Impact of gender
bias/stereotype on
leadership
RQ1, RQ2
Gender bias,
stereotype
2. How would you
define your
leadership journey?
Who were your supporters
along the way?
(mentors, managers.,
etc.)
RQ1, RQ2 Human capital
3. What obstacles, if
any, have you
encountered on your
leadership path?
What were the challenges
to the path to leadership
RQ1, RQ2
Human capital,
gender differences,
bias
4. How did you balance
home/life demands?
How to balance work/life
balance; major issue for
women
RQ2, RQ3 Human capital
5. What role did
professional
development play in
your career
advancement, if any?
Prompt for examples of
impact the of
developmental
opportunities on career
growth
RQ1, RQ2 Human capital
6. How are women
different than men in
their leadership
style?
Are there gender style
differences/effectiveness
RQ1, RQ2 Gender differences
7. What attributes do
you believe would be
advantageous for
navigating the
leadership path for
women?
Are there attributes that
help women climb to
leadership?
RQ1, RQ2, RQ3 Gender differences
8. How would you
define your
leadership style?
Style differences/common
themes
RQ1 Gender differences
9. How are the
expectations
different for women
around education
attainment? Work
experience?
Are women held to a
higher standard? Can
you give an example?
RQ2, RQ3 Human capital

129

Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed
Key concepts
addressed
10. In your opinion, how
can organizations
bring about gender-
balanced leadership?
Role of organizations in
bringing about gender
parity in leadership
RQ2, RQ3
Gender
differences/bias/
human capital
11. What are some
factors why C-suite
roles are not
reflective of the
workforce?
Reinforces previous prob
into why there are not
enough women in
higher roles
RQ1, RQ2, RQ3
Gender differences,
bias
12. Reflecting on your
experiences, describe
any positive or
negative impact the
organization’s
commitment to
gender equality had
on your career
progression?
Impact of commitment in
organizations to gender
parity
R2
Organizational
commitment
13. Describe the impact,
the presence or
absence, of
accountability
processes concerning
gender equality on
your career
progression?
Impact of accountability
in organizations to
gender parity
R2
Organizational
accountability

Conclusion to the interview
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and participating in my study! I appreciate
your time and willingness to share your background and experience, as it will be extremely
valuable in paving the path forward for the next generation of women leaders. Do you have a
preference in the form of communication for any follow-up questions I may have? If so, would
you prefer an email, a call, or another Zoom meeting? Again, thank you for participating in my
study.

130

Appendix C: Informed Consent
INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH

STUDY TITLE: The Leadership Labyrinth: Women’s Journey to C-suite Roles
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Nely Gamini
FACULTY ADVISOR: Patricia Tobey, PhD

You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. Please ask questions about anything unclear to you.

PURPOSE
This study aims to investigate the underrepresentation of women in C-suite roles across a wide
range of industries. We hope to learn from narratives of women who have successfully navigated
the leadership journey and overcome the challenges of gaining access to C-suite roles. You are
invited to participate because you are a woman in a C-suite level role.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Participants will join a meeting with the investigator via Zoom. Each interview will take about an
hour, using audio/video recording. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to give verbal
consent to the interview and be recorded. All participants will have the option to decline to be
recorded and continue their participation.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
There will be no payment for participation.

CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the study. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
The investigator is the only person with access to the interview data. The investigator will utilize
Zoom and video recording, kept in a password-protected computer, where data will be erased
after twelve months. The discussions will be recorded so the investigator can focus on the
responses from the participants versus taking notes. All personal identities will be
shielded/disguised using pseudonyms to maintain the anonymity of the participants.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact the investigator at Nely Gamini, at
ngamini@usc.edu or the study chair, Patricia Tobey, PhD at tobey@usc.edu.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

131

Appendix D: A Priori Coding Table
Primary codes Secondary codes Tertiary codes
Human capital
Education
Work experience
Developmental opportunities Self-driven
Connections
Work/home balance Compromise
Support systems
Gender differences
Style and effectiveness Gender intelligence
Self-efficacy Confidence
Self-promotion
Prejudice
Gender stereotypes
Unconscious bias Awareness
Education
Cross pressures
Vulnerability and reactance
Intersectionality
Commitment
Leadership commitment
Gender-inclusive goals
Development opportunity
Accountability
Practices
Performance evaluations

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Secrets from the C-suite: women leaders on the bridging gap

PDF

Prescription for change: gender barriers impact on healthcare leadership equity

PDF

Racial and gender gaps in executive management: a retrospective examination of the problem cause and strategies to address disparities

PDF

Underrepresentation of women in the U.S. banking industry’s top executive roles: why doesn’t the CEO look like me?

PDF

The importance of mentoring in leadership self-efficacy for women in supply chain: a qualitative study

PDF

Negotiation strategies for women impacting the expanding gender earnings gap at midlife

PDF

Minding the gender gap: self-efficacy and women senior leadership roles in banking

PDF

Shattering the glass ceiling: examining invisible barriers to women’s career progression in South Korean international schools

PDF

Gender disparity in law enforcement

PDF

Raising women leaders of Christian higher education: an innovation study

PDF

Women Chief Information Officers (CIOs): how did they make it?

PDF

Solving for the luck factor: leveling access to leadership through an organization-based sponsorship program

PDF

Increasing representation of women in executive technology leadership roles

PDF

The importance of mentoring in leadership self-efficacy for women in supply chain: a qualitative study

PDF

Leading as outsiders within the C-suite: a phenomenological study of Black women C-suite executives’ perspectives on White allyship in corporate America

PDF

Underemployment among U.S. military veterans in the private sector after transitioning from the military

PDF

Empowering Black women: Navigating breast cancer care and survivorship

PDF

An online strategic career planning and leadership development curriculum for women in upper-division undergraduate and graduate programs

PDF

Double jeopardy: the influence of prevalent race and gender bias on women of color executive leadership promotions

PDF

Gender barriers towards women on the career path and within executive leadership

Asset Metadata

Creator Gamini, Nilufar (author)

Core Title The leadership labyrinth: women's journey to chief future officer

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-12

Publication Date 09/05/2023

Defense Date 08/09/2023

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag bias in C-suite,gender equality,gender intelligence,gender parity in leadership,leadership labyrinth,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational accountability,self-efficacy,self-promotion,unconscious bias

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia Elaine (committee chair), Krop, Cathy Sloane (committee member), Pritchard, Marcus Allen (committee member)

Creator Email nelygamini@yahoo.com,ngamini@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113303094

Unique identifier UC113303094

Identifier etd-GaminiNilu-12315.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-GaminiNilu-12315

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Gamini, Nilufar

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230906-usctheses-batch-1091 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu