University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Where are the female executive leaders?

(USC Thesis Other)

Where are the female executive leaders?

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Where Are the Female Executive Leaders?
by
Valerie Joy Oswalt

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

May 2022

© Copyright by Valerie Joy Oswalt 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Valerie Joy Oswalt certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Kimberly Hirabayashi
Eric Canny
Corinne Hyde, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
Fifty years ago the first female leader became CEO of an S&P 500 company. Since then, not
much progress has been made. As of January 2022, only 31 females (6.2%) held CEO positions
of S&P 500 companies in the United States. Female leaders in the United States are
underrepresented at the executive level despite data showing that females are entering the
workforce at similar rates to men, with similar ambitions, and that companies deliver stronger
financial performance when they have more female leaders. The purpose of this study was to
explore the experiences of executive females in the United States in order to gain a more
comprehensive understanding of how they explain their underrepresentation in executive-level
positions. A qualitative approach to data collection involved interviews with 10 female leaders at
S&P 500 companies in the United States from a variety of industries. The findings suggest that it
is not one obstacle driving the underrepresentation of female leaders but rather the culmination
of obstacles over time eroding their ambitions and, in some cases, driving females to opt out of
leadership roles. Significant personal sacrifices were made in service of their careers, often times
at the expense of their own well-being, leading to burn out or exhaustion driving several
participants to reassess their career ambitions or opt out of their careers entirely. Companies that
supported female executive leaders and had role models available to them, increased job
satisfaction and retention. A greater commitment is needed to create a sense of belonging in the
workplace, to design a work environment that supports, promotes, and rewards well-being, to
enable flexible work arrangements, to implement the universal caregiver model of familial leave,
and to ensure a fair and equitable performance evaluation process is being executed.
Keywords: stereotype, obstacles, female executive, gender bias, underrepresentation

v
Acknowledgements
Thank you to the important people in my life that supported me through this program.
Especially my amazing children Scott William Oswalt and Lauren Elizabeth Joy Oswalt, you are
my world! I could not have done it without you!

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ ix
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study ....................................................................................... 1
Context and Background of the Problem .......................................................................... 1
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions .................................................................. 3
Importance of the Study ................................................................................................... 3
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology ................................................... 4
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................ 6
Chapter Two: Literature Review ................................................................................................. 7
Social .............................................................................................................................. 8
Institutional ................................................................................................................... 16
Individual ...................................................................................................................... 28
Expectancy-Value Theory ............................................................................................. 34
Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................. 35
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 38
Chapter Three: Methodology ..................................................................................................... 39
Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 39
Overview of Research Design ........................................................................................ 39
Qualitative Research Setting .......................................................................................... 40
The Researcher .............................................................................................................. 40
Participants .................................................................................................................... 41
Instrumentation.............................................................................................................. 42

vii
Data Collection Procedures ....................................................................................................... 43
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 44
Validity and Reliability .................................................................................................. 44
Credibility and Trustworthiness ..................................................................................... 45
Ethics ............................................................................................................................ 46
Underlying Ethics .......................................................................................................... 46
Chapter Four: Findings.............................................................................................................. 47
Description of the Participants ....................................................................................... 47
Research Findings Pertaining to Research Question 1 .................................................... 49
Summary of Research Question 1 .................................................................................. 71
Research Findings Pertaining to Research Question 2 .................................................... 73
Summary of Research Questions 2................................................................................. 82
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion ...................................................................... 84
Discussion of Findings .................................................................................................. 84
Findings in Context of Bronfenbrenner Framework ..................................................... 100
Recommendations for Practice..................................................................................... 104
Limitations and Delimitations ...................................................................................... 114
Recommendations for Future Research ........................................................................ 115
Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 116
References .............................................................................................................................. 118
Appendix A: Interview Protocol .............................................................................................. 134

viii
List of Tables
Table 1: Years of Work Experience, Race and Background of Interview Participants 48
Table 2: The Lack of Belonging 53
Table 3: Familial Leave Support in the United States 62
Table 4: Summary of Findings in Relation to the Conceptual Framework and Research
Questions 102
Table A1: Interview Protocol 136

ix
List of Figures
Figure 1: Summary of Obstacles 7
Figure 2: Ecological System Conceptual Model 37
Figure 3: Representation in the Corporate Pipeline 87

1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
This dissertation addresses the problem of the underrepresentation of female executive
leaders, which has been associated with negative corporate financial performance in the United
States. An executive leader is defined as an individual who manages or directs employees,
typically overseeing such business activities as fulfilling organizational financial goals, strategic
planning development, and overall decision making. A study conducted by Development
Dimensions International found that companies in the top 20% of financial performance had
27% female leaders and, conversely, the bottom 20% of financial performers had only 19%
female leaders (Adams, 2014).
Literature has shown that many factors hinder women from achieving and remaining in
executive-level positions, and the focus of this study is to understand the experiences of women
from a more comprehensive perspective. This problem is important to address because when
companies have more female leaders, they perform better financially. Companies improved
financial performance leads to a better economic state with a greater number of job
opportunities, better productivity, and more development (Tyagi, 2016). If more women were in
executive leadership roles, companies’ performance would improve, leading to stronger
economic growth in the United States.
Context and Background of the Problem
Female leaders in the United States are underrepresented at the executive level despite
the fact that females are entering the workforce and being promoted at similar rates to men.
According to Kent (2010), women are a dynamic and fast-growing economic force in the world
today. Furthermore, they account for $20 trillion in spending worldwide and $4 trillion in
female-owned business in GDP in the United States. As of October 2019, the total number of
2

nonfarm female employees in the United States account for 49.9% (Women’s Bureau 2019). Out
of the total workforce of females, 37% constitute lower-level and mid-level managerial positions,
and 26% of females are at senior managerial positions (Taneja et al., 2012). Despite data
showing that companies deliver stronger financial performance when they have more female
leaders, as of January 2022, only 6.2% of women held CEO positions in Standard & Poor’s
(S&P) 500 companies (Catalyst, 2022). It has taken since 1957, when the S&P 500 began, to
attain 6.2%, and at this rate, it will take approximately 470 more years to achieve 50% female
representation.
Females’ leadership aspirations wane over time. According to a study by Bain &
Company, 43% of females aspire to top management positions (Board, CEO level, and one or
two levels below CEO), but over time, females’ aspiration levels decrease by more than 60%,
while men’s stay the same (Coffman & Neuenfeldt, 2014). Additionally, 16% of educated, entry -
level females aspire to reach the top, but only 14% of those females believe it is worth the cost to
get to an executive-level position (Taneja et al., 2012).
When females finally do achieve the top spot, many of them opt out of the position. The
few women in the United States who do make it to the executive level tend to opt out at a rate
nearly four times faster than men, 26.9% versus 7.3%. Departure occurs despite being promoted
at a similar rate to men: 7.7% female versus 8.7% male (Network of Executive Women, 2018).
The compounding effect of obstacles faced over time impact females’ ability to attain and
remain in executive-level leadership positions. Examples are the absence of role models, the
consequences of stereotype threat, inadequate maternity leave policies, childcare challenges, and
the lack of flexibility (Casad & Bryant, 2016; Elliot et al., 2018; Smith, 2002; Solomon, 1989).
Females are entering the workforce at the same rate as men with similar career ambitions, but
3

somewhere along the way, their aspirations fade, and many of the female leaders who attain
executive-level positions eventually opt out.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to explore the experiences of executive females in the United
States in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how they explain their
underrepresentation in executive-level positions. The following questions are proposed to
understand why female leaders are underrepresented in executive leadership roles in the United
States.
1. How do female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States describe their
experience?
2. What factors do female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States say
influenced their career aspirations over time?
Importance of the Study
There is a negative impact on business performance resulting from the lack of female
leaders at the executive level. Enterprises with one or more female directors outperform
enterprises with no female directors by a mean of .57% in return on assets and 3.26% in return
on equity (Egerová & Noskova, 2019). Gender diversity also pays off in revenue, according to a
2014 study of employee survey data that discovered that offices that went from all men or all
women to 50/50 gender representation were associated with a 41% revenue increase (Catalyst,
2018).
Companies with more female leaders deliver better financial results. In 2016, Intel and
Dalberg Global Development Advisors found that technology companies could receive $320-
$390 billion in increased market value by closing the gender gap in leadership. A recent study
4

(Fang et al., 2018) found that at an average firm with total assets of $4.7 billion, one standard
deviation increase of gender heterogeneity leads to about a $189 million increase in market
value. If more women were in executive leadership roles, companies’ performance would
improve, which would lead to stronger United States economic growth.
Beyond the business case, having a more diverse organization with strong “diversity
climates” can lead to more successful recruitment and retention of talent, increased engagement
at work, improved innovation, and enhanced decision making (Catalyst, 2020).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The ecological system model (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) was used to analyze the problem of
the underrepresentation of female executives in leadership positions and to examine why they are
challenged to attain or remain in these positions. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological framework is one
of the most accepted explanations regarding the influence of social environments on human
development. The model focuses on the evolving interaction between the environment and the
developing person, who is at the innermost level (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Bronfenbrenner’s
theory is broken into interrelated systems that influence one another (Bronfenbrenner, 1994).
The microsystem is the impact family and friends have on the female executive, such as
the lack of family or spousal support, juggling a dual-career household, or the lack of role
models. The mesosystem, the second level, is the impact that the company and customers have
on female executives’ ability to obtain stretch assignments, garner support during career
transitions, and the feeling of isolation at executive levels. The exosystem, the third level, is the
industry that employs female workers. Inadequate access to childcare and maternity leave
policies, unconscious biases, lack of strong professional networks, and a lack of a diverse board
of directors drive the industry’s influences on females’ ability to advance into leadership roles.
5

The macroculture, the fourth level, is the society to which females are exposed, which imposes
stereotypes and gender biases.
Ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) examines the impact of different
environments on females, which impact their ability to attain and remain in executive leadership
roles in the United States. The theory argues that the environment in which one grows up affects
almost every facet of one’s life (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). These systems influence female
executives’ ability to achieve leadership roles. First are the social expectations they were
exposed to as children and the lack of female role models in leadership positions (Casad &
Bryant, 2016). Second are the consequences of stereotype threat, or the fear of confirming a
negative stereotype about one’s social group (Elliot et al., 2018). Third is the lack of flexibility
to juggle a dual-career household with children (Smith, 2002).
A theory of change is a process whereby stakeholders model their desired outcomes with
specific goals or interventions that need to occur to ensure those outcomes are attained (Clark &
Taplin, 2012). The researcher’s theory of ch ange to address the problem of practice is an
advocacy-based approach. This approach assumes that a deeper understanding of the
participants’ challenges can help the participants, companies, and industry address them
(Klugman, 2011). Females are entering the workforce at the same rate as men, with similar
aspirations, but over time more men advance and remain in leadership positions (Network of
Executive Women, 2018). Understanding the challenges driving women to opt out of executive-
level positions could drive change through public policy revisions, employee and employer
education, and increased support of mid-level women to prepare them for executive-level roles.
The advocacy-based theory of change and ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner,
1979) both suggest that the environment plays a major role in an individual’s development. I will
6

utilize Bronfenbrenner’s theory to understand the impact of environmental events, ecological
transitions, and shifts in role or settings on an individual’s development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).
Once understood, the advocacy-based theory of change will leverage the participants, their
environment, their companies, and the industry in which they work to address the obstacles.
A qualitative research methodology is appropriate for this study because the study’s
purpose is to explore the experiences of executive females and to examine why female leaders
are underrepresented in executive-level positions at S&P 500 companies in the United States.
Qualitative researchers seek to understand how participants construct their worlds, how they
interpret their experiences, and the meaning they attribute to them (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Given the need to explore and understand the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to social or
human problems, a qualitative approach is warranted (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Organization of the Study
The dissertation follows a traditional five-chapter model. Chapter One provides an
overview of the problem, the purpose of the project, and the importance of the study. Chapter
Two presents a review of the existing literature related to the problem of practice, including a
summary of the obstacles facing women today across our society, our institutions, and
individually. Chapter Three reviews the methodological approach that will be used in the study.
Chapter Four summarizes the findings from the research, and Chapter Five provides
recommendations stemming from the research.

7

Chapter Two: Literature Review
Over time, a confluence of obstacles erodes female’s professional ambitions leading them
to opt out or settle for underemployment. The purpose of this literature review is to summarize
many of the obstacles females face across our society, our institutions, and individually. The
chapter is not meant to present an exhaustive list of obstacles but an overview of the key
obstacles based on the research. The obstacles were categorized based on the Figure 1 presents a
summary of the obstacles.

Figure 1
Summary of Obstacles

Social Institutional Individual
Cultural Beliefs Gender Bias Social Identity Theory
Gender Stereotypes -Maternal Career Barriers Stereotype Threat
Role Incongruency Theory Motherhood Penalty In-group Bias Effect
Gender Bias Maternity Leave Policies Low Self-efficacy
-Glass Ceiling Lack of Flexibility Token Female
-Glass Cliff Wage Discrimination Pull of Personal vs. Professional Demands
-Sticky Floors Occupational Sex Segregation
-Broken Rungs Gender Bias
-Leaky Pipes
Lack of Female Role Models
8

Social
Societies are characterized by relationships between individuals who share a specific
culture, a group of individuals involved in social interactions, or a large social group (Merriam-
Webster, 2021). Summarized below are eight obstacles females may face in the United States.
Cultural Beliefs
Cultural beliefs regarding gender have led to discrimination against women in the
workplace, wage disparities, occupational sex segregation, lack of role models, and gender
stereotypes that negatively impact women’s ability to achieve executive-level positions. Scholars
generally regard cultural beliefs about gender as foundational to discrimination against women in
the workplace (Ridgeway & England, 2007). Wage disparities, occupational sex segregation, and
gender differences in authority, for example, are well documented (Padavic & Reskin, 2002).
Women, often regarded as the nicer, kinder sex, have a cultural stereotype that is generally more
positive than that of men (Eagly & Mladinic, 1994), yet women are often victims of prejudice.
Cultural beliefs about gender are foundational to the discrimination and prejudice that women
experience in the workplace. These cultural beliefs shape our expectations of women and men,
which can lead to gender stereotypes.
Gender Stereotypes
Gender stereotypes are pervasive cognitive shortcuts that influence expectations people
have of women and men, contributing to women’s discriminatory treatment in the workplace.
Gender stereotypes influence the way people process information by describing how they expect
women and men are like and by prescribing how they should behave (Burgess & Borgida, 1999;
Deaux & Kite, 1993; Dodge et al., 1995; Glick & Fiske, 1999; Heilman, 2001). Gender
stereotypes and the expectations they may produce about both what women are like and how
9

they should behave can result in (a) devaluing their performance, (b) denying them credit for
their successes, or (c) penalizing them for being competent (Heilman, 2001). Pew Research
suggests that women are nearly twice as likely as men to say they experience gender
discrimination in the workplace (Rosentiel, 2012). Gender stereotypes influence the way people
expect men and women to behave, which can result in discrimination against women in the
workplace. Gender stereotypes of women can be an obstacle to their advancement into
executive-level leadership positions.
Stereotyped beliefs about the attributes of men and women are pervasive, widely shared,
and proved to be very resistant to change. Historically, leadership was depicted primarily in
masculine terms, and many leadership theories have focused mainly on stereotypical masculine
qualities (Miner, 1993). Men and women are thought to differ both in terms of achievement-
social- and service-oriented traits. Executive-level jobs are almost always considered to be male
in sex-type, achievement-oriented aggressiveness, and emotional toughness (Heilman, 2001).
Gender stereotypes are automatically activated and can be particularly damaging for women in
leadership roles where masculine and feminine attributes are often considered essential (Chemers
& Murphy, 1995; Fiske, 1998; Kunda & Spencer, 2003). Men are expected to be agentic by
being assertive, independent, rational, and decisive, whereas women are expected to foster
communal characteristics, including showing concern for others, warmth, helpfulness, and
nurturance (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Gender stereotypes can be damaging to women in leadership
roles where masculine attributes are considered to be essential.
Women face discrimination when they occupy leadership roles associated with male
attributes versus female attributes. Gender stereotypes lead to leadership roles being associated
with male-dominated traits such as competitiveness, conformity, and power. When women
10

display these male-dominated traits, they tend to be disliked (Jones & Schneider, 2010). This
dynamic is associated with role congruity theory which asserts that the agentic qualities thought
requisite in the leadership role are incompatible with the predominantly communal attributes
associated with women, thus resulting in prejudice against female leaders (Hoyt et al., 2009).
The perception of successful female managers is different from women in general (Heilman et
al., 1989).
Additionally, status incongruity hypothesis proposes that women who possess or pursue
power are de facto status incongruent. In particular, when their behavior violates status
expectations, it elicits backlash. Traits associated with that stereotype are incompatible with the
traits needed for the job or task at hand (Burgess & Borgida, 1999; Fiske et al., 1991). Thus,
women in occupations dominated by men may be especially prone to this kind of discrimination
(Burgess & Borgida, 1999). When women display male-dominated traits that are often associated
with success in leadership roles, they tend to be disliked, discriminated against, and perceived
differently than women in general. These gender stereotypes are pervasive and damaging, and
many female leaders have a pessimistic view of them changing over time.
Role Incongruity Theory
When the stereotype of female traits (e.g., communal, kind, and supportive) collide with
the stereotype of leadership traits (e.g., independent, assertive, and tough), it can create a
perceived incongruity between the female gender role expectations and leadership role
expectations. People associate leadership roles with more masculine than feminine attributes
(Schein, 2001). Per role congruity theory, this perceived incongruity can lead to two forms of
prejudice: (a) the perception that men are more favorable candidates for potential leadership
roles and (b) evaluating females less favorably for displaying the necessary leadership role traits
11

than if men were displaying them (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Role congruency theory asserts that
the agentic qualities thought requisite for leadership roles are incompatible with the
predominantly communal attributes associated with females, thus resulting in prejudice towards
female leaders (Hoyt et al., 2009).
In addition to the prescribed traits, which consist of rules regarding how males and
females should behave (Eagly & Karau, 2002), there are proscriptive traits which are negative
qualities that are prohibited for only one gender (Rudman et al., 2012). For example, strong male
traits (e.g., assertive) are proscribed for females but tolerated for males, while weaker female
traits (e.g., meekness) are proscribed for males but tolerated for females (Prentice & Carranza,
2002). The result of this mismatch between a group stereotype and a job role is articulated as a
lack of fit (Heilman, 1983, 2001). For female leaders, this lack of fit can result in negative
performance expectations, which in turn produce biased evaluations, prejudice, and backlash
(Eagly & Karau, 2002; Heilman, 1983, 2001; Rudman et al., 2012). The negative consequences
of lack of fit make it difficult for females to attain and remain in leadership roles in the United
States.
Backlash occurs when agentic females are perceived to be competent but less likable and
hirable than males who behave the same way (Rudman et al., 2012). According to Skelly and
Johnson (2011), individuals are penalized when they do not perform according to societal
expectations. Males are believed and expected to be agentic by possessing characteristics such as
independence, decisiveness, and rationality, whereas females are believed and expected to be
warm, nurturing, and helpful (Hoyt et al., 2009). This prejudice has been empirically
demonstrated to result in less favorable attitudes toward female leaders, greater difficulty for
them to reach executive leadership roles, and greater difficulty for them to be viewed as effective
12

(Hoyt et al., 2009). The current research calls attention to females’ dilemma because their gender
status is lower than their male counterparts, so they must enact agency to be considered fit for
leadership. Once they do, they risk backlash (Rudman, 1998). Despite the fact that males and
females typically demonstrate different leadership qualities, organizations continue to measure
both male and female leaders on characteristics that apply to leadership in male-dominated
companies (Baker, 2014; Vanderbroeck, 2010).
Status incongruity theory suggests that agentic female leaders risk social and economic
penalties for behaving counter-stereotypically (Kim et al., 2019). Low-agency female leaders
were seen as less qualified than comparable male leaders, with no risk for backlash, while high-
agency female leaders who challenged the status quo were seen as similarly competent to other
highly qualified male leaders but received backlash (Rudman, 1998). The difference in backlash
between less qualified female leaders and highly qualified ones is likely because the less
qualified do not threaten the gender hierarchy. Gender hierarchy is a social system that stresses
sex differences and assigns a higher status to one sex over another (Berdahl, 2007). Being male
is associated with higher status in most cultures and societies and is supported by men’s relative
control over global wealth, higher wages in most countries, lower time devoted to unpaid care
and domestic duties, higher representation in executive leadership roles, and greater influence
over important household decisions (Buss, 1989; Connell, 1995; Roser et al., 2019; Williams &
Best, 1990). Defending the gender hierarchy is a primary motive for backlash, which happens
when female leaders are sabotaged for being too powerful for challenging the status quo
(Rudman et al., 2012). Female leaders are placed into a challenging situation. When they exhibit
the leadership traits necessary to be competent, they may receive backlash. When they do not,
they may be perceived as incompetent to lead. This situation is also known as the double bind.
13

Because of these cultural stereotypes, female leaders face a double bind (Eagly & Carli,
2004). They are expected to be communal because of the expectations inherent in the female
gender role and to be agentic because of the expectations inherent in most leader roles. The
tension between the communal qualities that people prefer in women and the predominantly
agentic qualities they expect in leaders creates cross-pressure (Eagly, 2007). Catalyst (2007,
2018) referred to this tension as the double-bind dilemma whereby perceptions of gender
stereotypes are manifested, creating the tendency for women to be seen as competent or likable,
but rarely both. This dilemma is referred to as the social role theory which suggests that women
should be communal or likely to try to please others (Eagly & Wood, 2012). This creates a
predicament in which, when female leaders behave as expected, they are labeled too soft.
Alternatively, if they are assertive and firm, they are too tough. These restrictions create a trade-
off that women face and men do not. Female managers and executives are challenged with
balancing passiveness with assertiveness to satisfy expectations and meet job demands. The
double-bind challenge will prevail for female leaders until these gender stereotypes are
addressed.
Gender stereotypes have been reinforced over decades with the slow progress of change
and low expectations of being addressed in the near future. According to Wood (2008),
responses obtained from middle managers over an 8-year period suggest a pessimistic change in
views and were consistent that gender stereotyping of the management role continues, exerting a
negative influence on women’s career advancement in senior management positions. The
majority of these male and female managers felt that it would take more than 10 years before
female managers fill half of all senior management positions, suggesting that some respondents
do not believe they will see this outcome during their working lifetime (Wood, 2008). Gender
14

stereotypes towards women still exist, exert a negative influence over their career advancements,
and have been slow to change. Gender stereotypes set the foundation for gender bias in the
workplace.
Gender Bias
Gender bias is the tendency to prefer one gender over another. Typically, it is a form of
unconscious or implicit bias when an individual is attributing certain beliefs about another
person or group. In the workplace, gender bias is believed to be one of the obstacles contributing
to the underrepresentation of women in executive-level positions. Blau et al. (2010) stated that if
pipeline and work-life balance effects do not explain women’s under representation in executive
positions, underrepresentation must be attributed to discrimination. Discrimination may not be
overt and detectable from outside the organization, as it is subtle and hard to prove. This suggests
that gender bias may be at play.
Because of gender bias and the way in which it influences evaluations of work settings, it
is argued that being competent does not ensure that a woman will advance to the same
organizational level as an equivalently performing man. It is proposed that gender bias in
evaluation is a primary cause of why women are so scarce at the top level of organizations
(Heilman, 2001). Warren (2009) identified cascading gender bias as the potential for leadership
bias to influence organizational human resource management systems. The senior leadership
effect, the concept of think leader-think male, and the idea that people generally prefer to work
with and associate with others who share their beliefs, values, and interest (Schulz & Enslin,
2014) can all result in gender bias. Whether overt or subtle, this bias can influence performance
evaluations and create discrimination in the leadership selection process. Gender bias shows up
in the workplace in a variety of ways; glass ceiling (Hymowitz & Schelhardt, 1986), glass cliff
15

(Ryan & Haslam, 2005), sticky floors (Booth et al., 2003), broken rungs (Elsesser, 2019), leaky
pipelines (Clark Blickenstaff, 2005) or maternal walls (Williams et al., 2004).
The Glass Ceiling and the Glass Cliff
The glass ceiling and the glass cliff refer to two types of gender biases that may challenge
women in their organizations. The glass ceiling is an invisible barrier to advancement. The
phrase first coined by Marilyn Loden at a 1978 Women’s Exposition in New York and was later
popularized by The Wall Street Journal in 1986 (Hymowitz & Schelhardt, 1986). The glass cliff
is the idea that female executives are appointed to lead companies in financial duress as a last
resort, thus being set up to fail (Credit Suisse AG, 2016). This prejudice leads to less favorable
attitudes toward female leaders and greater difficulty for them to reach elite positions and be
viewed as effective. This prejudice contributes to the invisible yet durable glass ceiling that
prevents women from ascending into elite leadership positions. (Hoyt et al., 2009).
Women are opting out because they feel isolated or lack the necessary flexibility to
manage their personal and professional lives and because of the challenges of overcoming
gender bias (Network of Executive Women, 2018). The glass ceiling and the glass cliff are two
examples of gender bias in the workplace that hinder women’s advancement into executive-level
positions by creating an invisible barrier to advancement and setting up women to fail once they
have achieved an executive-level position. However, before someone can face the glass ceiling
or the glass cliff, they need to get promoted from the floor.
Sticky Floors and Broken Rungs
The sticky floor metaphor describes the phenomenon of the disparity in promotions
between women and men, where women get stuck at the lowest levels of the corporate hierarchy
compared to men (Elsesser, 2019; Ishizuka, 2016). This situation is also referred to as the broken
16

rung. Research conducted by McKinsey and LeanIn.Org, who surveyed 329 companies, found
that for every 100 men promoted to or hired at the manager level, only 72 women were hired or
promoted to manager (Elsesser, 2019). The research suggests that the reason women struggle to
make it to the first rung of the corporate ladder is not related to pausing their careers for
childcare or lack of ambition, suggesting bias may be at play. To address female leaders’
underrepresentation at the executive level, we must ensure an ample pipeline of female talent.
Institutional
An institution is an established organization or corporation (Merriam-Webster, 2021).
Below is a summary of seven obstacles female executive leaders face across governmental,
educational, and occupational institutions.
Maternal Career Barriers
The maternal wall refers to stereotypes and various forms of discrimination against
working mothers, other caregivers, or mothers seeking employment. By 2019, 63.8% of women
with children under the age of 3 years entered the workforce in the United States. This rate
almost doubled from 1975 when only 34.3% participated in the workforce (U.S. Department of
Labor Women’s Bureau). While par ticipation rates have nearly doubled, the U.S. workplace has
failed to keep pace, resulting in incidences of maternal wall discrimination and lawsuits (Luceno,
2006). While maternal walls occurs in society as well, for purposes of this study, it is categorized
as an institutional obstacle because companies have the ability to address discrimination against
working mothers. It is argued that women cost companies more and that companies treat women
identified as career primary different from those with children who want flexibility on the job
(Solomon, 1989). According to Luceno (2006), social psychology studies report that female
leaders are usually rated as highly competent, similar to male leaders, until they become working
17

mothers. Then, they are rated closer to housewives who are viewed on par with the elderly, blind,
and disabled (Luceno, 2006, p. 159).
Female leaders may find their effectiveness questioned once they become pregnant, take
maternity leave, or desire a more flexible work schedule to accommodate their new family
obligations. The basis for the maternal wall discrimination is generally the stereotype that once a
woman starts a family, her priorities shift from work to home, preventing her from being as
reliable or competent as she was before (Luceno, 2006). Despite the increase in the number of
working mothers participating in the U.S. labor force, organizations’ cultur es have largely
remained the same. The long work hours, lack of flexible work schedules, frequent travel
demands, job relocation requirements, and limited personal leave make it difficult for working
mothers to manage both personal and professional obligations. Further complicating the rigid
professional demands is that women continue to own familial responsibilities disproportionately
(Steinfield & Scott, 2018). It is necessary for organizations and the government to support new
cultural norms that offer flexible work arrangements and increased personal leave.
Motherhood Penalty
It is argued that the motherhood penalty is the disadvantage mothers may suffer due to
having children and careers. Although all women face obstacles in the workplace, differences
exist in the obstacles women with children face versus women without children. Women with
children experience a disadvantage in wages, level of labor force participation, occupational
status, and the perception that they are no longer focused on their careers. Many women believe
that having children is a barrier to their career advancement (Liff & Ward, 2001), partly because
of the perception and stereotypes of women with children as de-prioritizing work for family,
which can lead to discriminatory behavior in the workplace.
18

Society still associates women with the role of childrearing. The dissonance between
domestic caretaking directly opposes a woman’s desire to work, which can lead to stress and
imbalance between work and personal life, thus hindering women from progressing into
executive-level leadership positions (Jones & Schneider, 2010). Women with children are more
likely to take more career breaks than women without children, and career breaks negatively
impact managerial advancement (Tharenou, 1999a). Findings show important differences in the
obstacles to advancement for mothers and non-mothers, such as a negative relation to the
advancement of women with children due to smaller internal networks (Metz, 2005). Working
mothers tend to take more career breaks, take on the additional stress of dissonance between
being a mother and a leader, and have smaller internal networks. These obstacles hinder their
advancement. Although women’s participation in the workplace has increased, they still tend to
take on the primary care of children and domestic duties.
As of 2016, the percentage of women aged 25 to 54 in the U.S. workplace increased to
74% from 37% in 1962 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017). Despite the increase in
responsibilities outside the home, women continue to be the primary caregivers (Wirth, 2001).
This demand damages a mother’s ability or the perception of her ability to dedicate as many
hours as possible to work, which is named the time scarcity hypothesis. Having children weakens
the relationship between work hours and managerial advancement. The importance of work
hours to advancement may force mothers to make choices they would not otherwise make (Metz,
2005). Women who are planning to become mothers or are mothers tend to take career breaks,
reduce focus on their education, choose occupations that offer more flexibility, opt for part-time
work, forego promotional opportunities, or deprioritize their careers. As a result, they achieve
19

less than women who stay on track with full-time employment and can take advantage of
training and career advancement opportunities (Kahn et al., 2014).
The age at which women have children also matters. Women who wait longer and have
fewer children suffer fewer career penalties (Kahn et al., 2014). When married women with
children are supported by a sizeable spousal income, they may face different incentives for labor
force participation and career advancement (Kahn et al., 2014). Working mothers may need to
reprioritize the hours they spend working, take career breaks, reduce focus on education, and opt
for a more flexible work schedule, forcing them to deprioritize their careers. Women who wait
longer and have fewer children tend to make fewer accommodations and advance more in their
careers. Support offered by government and employer maternity leave can affect the size of the
motherhood penalty because women who take paid leave are more likely to stay in the workplace
than those who take unpaid leave.
Maternity Leave Policy
The United States is one of only three countries worldwide with no national policy
guaranteeing paid leave to employed women who give birth (Jou et al., 2018). According to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 11% of American workers are covered by voluntary paid family
leave policies. In 1993, the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) required covered employers to
provide employees with job-protected and unpaid leave for qualified medical and family reasons.
It is only 12 weeks, and roughly only 50% of American workers have access to it (Burtle &
Bezruchka, 2016). The FMLA leaves the United States as one of the few countries in the world
to fall below the World Health Organization’s recommended 16 weeks of maternity leave.
Women who take paid maternity leave experience a 47% decrease in the odds of re-hospitalizing
their infants and a 51% decrease in the odds of being re-hospitalized themselves at 21 months
20

postpartum, compared to women taking unpaid or no leave (Jou et al., 2018). A study that
compared women’s careers in the United States to Western countries with long paid-leave
benefits concluded that in the United States, women were more likely to stop working, and the
women who were likely to stay in the workforce had high-paying jobs (Cohen, 2014). The lack
of a national policy guaranteeing paid maternity leave for longer than 12 weeks is an obstacle to
women advancing into executive-level positions in the United States. A national paid maternity
leave program’s benefits extend beyond women’s retention and promotion in the workplace.
The benefits of a national paid maternity leave program for both children and mothers are
significant. For children, there are fewer low birthweight babies, fewer infant deaths, and
increased long-term achievement. For mothers, there are higher rates of breastfeeding, a decrease
in the odds of hospitalization, and improvement in mental health. The percentage of preterm
births in the United States is higher than in any other developed country (Burtle & Bezruchka,
2016). The United States has the highest infant mortality rate out of 28 wealthy countries: 6.1 out
of every 1,000 babies born in the United States die (Froese, 2016). The quantity and quality of
time a mother spends with her child in their first year of life matters for the child’s long -term
well-being (Burtle & Bezruchka, 2016). Sudden infant death syndrome accounts for 21% of
American infant mortality and is strongly linked inversely to breastfeeding (Burtle & Bezruchka,
2016). According to a University of Maryland study, maternity leave can help reduce the risk of
postpartum depression (PPD). A recent study found that one in seven women may experience
PPD in the year after giving birth. That is almost 600,000 PPD diagnoses in the United States
(Blake, 2013).
The benefits of a national paid maternity leave program improve the health and well-
being of children and mothers in the United States. Yet, the United States remains the only first-
21

world, industrialized country that does not mandate a paid maternity leave (Cohen, 2014). The
lack of a national program contributes to the need for working mothers to make difficult career
choices. Additionally, as of 2012, the vast majority of Americans believed it was best for both
young children to have a mother who stays home or works part-time, and it was also the ideal
situation for a woman with young children (Rosentiel, 2012). Specifically, 33% of Americans
said that the ideal situation for young children is to have a mother who does not work at all, and
42% said that the ideal was a mother who only works part-time.
Meanwhile, research also suggests that only 16% of women intended to leave the
workforce due to having children (Jones & Schneider, 2010). Women with children tend to find
it difficult to re-enter higher levels, forcing women to stay in female-friendly occupations, work
part-time or be under-employed (Jones & Schneider, 2010). Women executives are less likely
than male executives to be married or have children, suggesting that they may have been so
ambitious or involved with their careers that they sacrificed nonwork interests to devote more
time to their jobs (Lyness & Thompson, 1997). Forty-two percent of corporate women are
childless by age 40, but only 14% planned to be (Jones & Schneider, 2010). According to Smyth
(2020), in order to improve the retention of women with children in the workplace, they need to
feel that taking time off to have a family is a socially accepted norm. Despite early ambitions to
pursue both a successful career and have a family, women are either having no children, are
having fewer children later in life, are opting out of the workplace to have children, or are
choosing to become under-employed when they start a family. Being a working mother in the
United States comes at a cost.
Lack of Flexibility
22

Women’s need for flexibility in the workplace differs by life stages but is more prevalent
during childrearing years when women tend to take on more household and family
responsibilities. America’s social and business policies make it difficult for women to balance
work and life. Sequencing of family and career has proven challenging regardless of the order.
Society needs to collectively value choices that put family ahead of career to address the need for
flexibility by working parents (Jones, 2012). Nearly 40% of highly educated women with
business and professional experience take some time off from their careers (Hymowitz, 2006).
Unless America’s social and business policies change to prioritize family ahead of career,
women will face the obstacle of balancing work and life, especially during childrearing years,
regardless of the sequencing of family and career. Workplace flexibility goes beyond managing
one’s work hours; it can also be defined as the ability to bring one’s whole self to work.
Bringing one’s whole self to work includes one’s identities and roles. It is important that
organizations help employees express, rather than suppress, the identities and roles they have
outside of work. This help is particularly valuable for working mothers. Enhancing the fit
between people and their work roles is a key to corporate competitiveness and survival (Hall &
Parker, 1993). Psychological engagement at work suggests that flexibility can encourage higher
levels of engagement and produce better work performance (Hall & Parker, 1993). Recognizing
transitions and conflicts among employees’ work and personal lives and helping them manage
these conflicts actually increases psychological availability for work. Creating a workplace
environment where individuals can bring their whole self to work can create the psychological
safety needed to retain working mothers. The lack of flexibility in the workplace comes at a cost.
The lack of flexibility in the workplace can come at an immense physical, psychological, and
emotional cost, offsetting the value created by women’s careers and driving women to opt out.
23

When an organization recognizes the demands, conflicts, and challenges between an employees’
work and their personal lives, a working parent, as an example, can increase their psychological
availability for work (Hall & Parker, 1993). Flexibility can encourage higher levels of
engagement in the activities and relationships that make up a job and, as a result, can produce
better work performance (Hall & Parker, 1993). Offering flexible work arrangements can reduce
some of the costs, improving executive-level female retention and increasing productivity. There
is an opportunity for organizations to invest in flexible work arrangements, yet we are not
making progress.
Despite the fact that flexible work arrangements can reduce some cost and improve
retention and productivity, studies show that women have less flexibility than their male
counterparts and actually lost ground from 2006 to 2010. Peterson and Wiens-Tuers (2014)
measured four variables related to flexibility in the workplace: (a) workers control of their work
time, (b) workers control of their overtime, (c) workers control of the extent of overtime hours,
and (d) the difficulty workers face taking time off to attend to personal or family matters.
Peterson and Wiens-Tuers (2014) found women workers have less flexibility than their male
counterparts and lost ground between 2006 and 2010. As the need for a more flexible work
environment increases in the United States, the data suggest that women actually receive less and
are expected to conform to the current norms. As Sylvia Ann Hewlett said, “We have been trying
to fix women, so they fit into the lockstep male career model, instead of changing the model”
(Hymowitz, 2006, p. 2). Eileen Byrne (1993) also pointed out “that if a plant doesn’t succeed in
a garden we ask what is about the soil, water, sun or fertilizer that is causing the problem, we
don’t blame the plant first” (p. 49). It is time that we challenge the current status quo of the
“ideal worker” in the United States and create an environment whe re more females can realize
24

their full career potential, creating equity throughout all levels of an organization, including the
executive levels where women are currently underrepresented.
Wage Discrimination
Women make less than men for the same work in the United States, which contributes to
the obstacles women face in attaining higher pay executive-level positions that men often hold in
the United States. In 2020, women made only $0.81 for every dollar a man-made (Payscale,
2020). Payscale (2020) found that the uncontrolled gender pay gap, which takes the ratio of the
median earnings of women to men without controlling for various compensable factors, has only
decreased by $0.07 since 2015. Both men’s and women’s earned incomes have been increasing,
but this upward trend has been steeper for men than for women, suggesting that the growth in
prosperity is not equitably distributed along gender lines (Schwab et al., 2017).
Women’s earnings start out equal to men ’s, but between 10 and 16 years in, the gender
gap expands, and women earn 55% of what men do. The evidence suggests that 84% of this gap
is driven by training prior to master’s in business administration (MBA; 24%), career
interruptions and job experiences (30%), and differences in weekly hours (30%; Goldin & Katz,
2011). Gender equality climate plays a key role in women’s performance. Women were under -
rewarded by a factor of 14 for the same work performance; only when women dominated
executive positions was this trend eliminated (Kim et al., 2019). Women continue to earn less
than men despite starting their careers earning equal amounts. One of the factors contributing to
wage discrimination in the United States is occupational gender segregation.
Occupational Sex Segregation
Occupational gender segregation occurs when a predominant gender exists in a particular
occupation. For example, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) positions
25

are dominated by males. Occupational segregation results in wage gaps and the loss of
opportunities for capable candidates who may have been overlooked because of their gender or
who may not have pursued the education or expertise necessary to participate in the labor pool.
Occupational segregation often occurs in patterns, across occupations, or within an occupation
and is most likely caused by gender-based discrimination (Biblarz et al., 1996). When females
enter male-dominated occupations, they are often met with discriminatory practices, as females
are often held to higher standards of achievement, receive less support, and face more extreme
evaluations (Bielby, 2000; McAdam, 2013). Despite many efforts to attract more women to
science, support more women who are already in science, or address the lack of inclusion of
women in science, the occupational gender gap still exists (Cronin & Roger, 1999). Further,
Cronin and Roger (1999) described the underrepresentation of women in STEM as both
progressive in that there are fewer women in higher-level leadership roles than entry-level roles
and as persistent because the problem still exists. One hypothesis for women’s
underrepresentation in STEM is referred to as leaky pipes.
Leaky Pipes
The phrase “l eaky pipes” is a metaphor frequently used to describe one rationale for
women’s underrepresentation in STEM careers. Clark Blickenstaff (2005) noted the pipeline
leaks at various stages: students who express interest in STEM subjects before college but
change their mind when applying to college, students who begin their post-secondary education
in a STEM program but change majors before graduation, and some who graduate but select
other careers post-graduation. The key to these leaks is that, along the pipeline, women leak out
more than men do (Clark Blickenstaff, 2005). Based on a longitudinal study by Brainard and
Carlin (1998), there was no difference in grade point average between the women who remained
26

in STEM programs and the women who transferred out of STEM programs. Clark Blickenstaff’s
(2005) research suggests that the explanation for the underrepresentation of women in STEM is a
complex interaction of multiple factors ranging from girls’ lack of early academic preparation
and poor attitude toward science, the absence of female scientists and engineers as role models,
science class curriculum materials and design favoring male students, an unwelcoming
environment for girls in science classes, an inherent masculine worldview in scientific
epistemology, and cultural pressure on girls to conform to traditional gender roles. The obstacles
to women’s adequate representation in STEM are similar to those facing women who aspire to
executive-level leadership positions in the United States.
Lack of Female Role Models
Female executive leaders’ underrepresentation of female executive leaders impacts an
organization’s ability to attract a wider pool of diverse talent, leading to feelings of isolation
among other aspiring female leaders who, in turn, may feel a low sense of belonging and perform
worse. The greater the number of female executive leaders at an organization, the more females
they will attract to the organization. The more female role models that are present, the more
likely they are to attract and retain more female leaders, which is necessary to break the cycle. If
a company lacks a critical mass of female role models, then female leaders may not have a sense
of belonging, which is one of the most important human needs (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). A
positive sense of belonging, especially early in a setting, helps individuals build substantive
relationships and provide lasting benefits (Elliot et al., 2018). Lack of access to social bonding
presented an obstacle to advancement for women in organizations and manifested in the
underrepresentation of women in executive positions (Schulz & Enslin, 2014). When females are
underrepresented in a group setting, they tend to experience a low sense of belonging and low
27

performance (Elliot et al., 2018). Female leaders’ underrepresentation in an organization can
manifest into a lower sense of belonging and access to social bonding, which can negatively
impact performance and career advancements. When these leaders lack a sense of belonging,
they are not comfortable bringing their whole self to work, creating additional obstacles to their
advancement.
The inability to bring one’s whole self to work can create a sense of not belonging, which
can lead to feelings of isolation, a contributor to female executives’ increased attrition rates in
the United States (The Network of Executive Women, 2018). Women switch back and forth
between professional and personal identities, resulting in negative job attitudes (von Hippel et
al., 2011a) and a reduced likelihood of recommending other women to the field (von Hippel et
al., 2015). According to Schrobsdorff (2017), research has shown that at least 30% of a group
must consist of nonconformists before the other label is abandoned and each member is valued
for him or herself. When individuals make up less than 15% of a dominant majority group, it is
difficult for them to voice their ideas (Schrobsdorff, 2017). When women are in visible
leadership roles, they tend to attract a wider pool of talent that includes females and ethnic
minorities (Smyth, 2020). When women represent less than 15% of a dominant majority group,
they have difficulty finding their voice and bringing their whole selves to work, leading to job
dissatisfaction. More women as visible leaders in the workplace with a sense of belonging
increase job satisfaction and performance improvement. Not having a critical mass of women
role models is an obstacle for women in the workplace.
Having female role models in an organization can provide examples for women to aspire
to certain levels, increase the availability of mentors for other women, and create a sense of
belonging. Role models are often thought of as changing the representation of a setting and
28

conveying information about the self and what kind of person one could become (Elliot et al.,
2018). Individuals learn from role models whose behavior they wish to emulate (Smith, 2002). It
is easier to aspire to something that others have done before (Smyth, 2020). Women in
organizations often face obstacles to obtaining mentors (Enslin, 2007; Evans, 2009). The lack of
female role models or mentors holding top positions can limit the social capital available for
women (Jones & Schneider, 2010). Female role models provide important examples of success
to aspiring leaders, create mentor opportunities, and improve the social capital available to
women. Having sufficient female role models is linked to an improvement in female executive
leaders’ self -efficacy, which will improve performance and increase retention rates of female
leaders.
Individual
As individuals, females are faced with obstacles starting from childhood into adulthood.
Below is a summary of eight obstacles females may face throughout their lifetime.
Social Identity Theory
Social identities play a role in shaping lives and can impact behavior, from how
individuals perform in the classroom to career choices. Social identity is the numerous ways
people classify themselves: by gender, religion, political affiliation, university, job occupation
and so on. Social identities allow people to categorize themselves within a social environment to
provide a sense of belonging. Steele (2010) researched how one’s social identity can lead to
identity contingencies, which are challenges one may face in a situation because of one’s social
identity. Identity contingencies can be overt constraints driven by laws or can be subtle
influences driven by threats or beliefs. Tajfel and Turner (1986) asserted that people whose
social identity is threatened worry both about what negative stereotypes say about them and
29

about what they say about their social identity groups. Stigmatized groups underperform due to
the pressure to not confirm a stigmatized view of oneself or a stereotype of one’s social identity
group (Steele, 2010). Therefore, the presence of stereotype threat in an organization can
adversely affect one’s ability to perform to expectations and hinder an individual’s career
potential.
Stereotype Threat
The pressure to not conform to or validate the stereotypes of one’s social identity group
adds stress to the individual, which in certain contexts, can lead to stereotype threat. Stereotype
threat is the fear of confirming a negative stereotype about one’s social group. The negative
consequences of stereotype threat can lead to an underrepresentation of women in certain careers
and hinder them from progressing into senior-level positions in the United States. Stereotype
threat occurs when individuals become fearful that their social group is devalued by others
(Crocker & Major, 1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Repeated exposure to certain images causes
individuals who are fearful of confirming the stereotype to internalize that stereotype, implicitly
accepting as true to the group and perhaps to themselves (Steele, 2010). For example, women
were less interested in taking leadership roles after viewing gender stereotypic television
commercials (Casad & Bryant, 2016). This is supported by research that shows women who
behave in ways counter to gender stereotypes may face social backlash (von Hippel et al.,
2011b).
The results from this mismatch between a group stereotype and a job role are negative
performance expectations, which can produce biased personnel performance evaluations
(Heilman & Eagly, 2008). It is important for performance evaluations to be unbiased because
they play an important role in self-development and succession planning. Biased performance
30

evaluations can hinder an employee from achieving their career aspirations. Stereotype threat can
reduce career aspirations, job engagement, and receptivity to feedback (Casad & Bryant, 2016).
In addition, people need to exert self-control in order to overcome stereotype threat, requiring
them to work harder to maintain performance (Inzlicht et al., 2006b). Further, if a minority faces
constant stereotype threats, they may become stigmatized and disidentify from that domain
(Steele & Aronson, 1995). Additionally, the lack of female role models is a self-perpetuating
cycle; when no female or minority leaders are present, no information counter to the stereotype is
available, and stereotype threat persists (Casad & Bryant, 2016). Domain disidentification also
contributes to reducing career and performance goals (Major & Schmader, 1998). When women
believe they are confirming negative stereotypes about their gender, they reduce the value placed
on their employment.
Women prefer to reduce the value placed on their work and employer than validate a
negative stereotype or their anticipated poor performance. Women are not being judged just for
themselves. They do not want anyone to say, “ a woman can’t handle that job” (Solomon, 1989 ,
p. 2). To protect their self-esteem, women under stereotype threat may disengage from the
potential consequences of their work performance (Casad & Bryant, 2016). This disengagement
may lead to feelings of powerlessness, unhappiness, and ultimately higher attrition. According to
Steele (2010), if the group members underperformed when they were stigmatized, but not when
they were not stigmatized, we would have evidence that stigmatization alone impaired their
intellectual performance. For example, women tend to underperform in advanced math classes,
where evidence suggests they feel gender stigma, but not in advanced English classes, where
evidence suggests the stigma is less felt. The pressure not to confirm a stigmatizing view of
oneself made women underperform in this experiment. The fear women have of validating
31

negative stereotypes impacts their job satisfaction, oftentimes leading to them resigning from
their organizations. Belonging to social groups and being supported by an in-group network
enhance feelings of belonging and help offset stereotype threat.
In-Group Bias Effect
Being a part of a group can create a sense of belonging and increase self-esteem.
However, when individuals are not a part of a group, they can feel isolated, discriminated
against, and prejudged. This is referred to as in-group bias. In-group bias is the tendency for
individuals to treat others who belong to the same social group better than those who do not
(Post, 2021). In a 1973 experiment by Billig and Tajfel, favoritism was considerably and
significantly stronger towards individuals who were in the same group after those groups were
explicitly categorized. The opposite treatment was given to the individuals who were in the out-
group (Billig & Tajfel, 1973).
Social identity theory, founded by Billig and Tajfel (1973), is the most commonly
accepted explanation for in-group bias. Billig and Tajfel (1973) suggested that individuals seek
to create social categorization as a system of orientation to understand their own place in society.
A study by Yamagishi et al. (1998) further expanded the in-group study to evaluate the behavior
of individuals that had no incentive to treat in-group and out-group members differently. The
study concluded that in-group bias is not driven by merely belonging to a group but by the
expectation of reciprocity from in-group members (Post, 2021). Too often, female leaders find
themselves in the out-group, potentially leading to discrimination and prejudice. This sense of
being an outsider can create a lack of belonging, negatively impacting female leaders’ happiness
and work performance.

32

Low Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy, the beliefs a person holds regarding their ability to affect a situation,
determines how individuals evaluate the environment. Self-efficacy is believed to affect every
aspect of human endeavor (Bandura, 1977). When women do not have positive female role
models, their self-efficacy can be lowered. Individuals with higher self-efficacy will see
opportunities, whereas those with low self-efficacy will see problems (Krueger & Dickson, 1993,
1994). A low sense of belonging and underperformance versus expectations may lead to low
self-efficacy, one of the four core features of human agency (Bandura, 1977). The workplace
environment and how women see themselves in it can have a shape self-efficacy, which impacts
performance and retention rates of executive-level females in the United States. Creating an
environment where women feel like they belong supported by positive female role models can
improve self-efficacy. Having more female role models in an organization can have a positive
effect on women leaders’ self -efficacy. An environment that instills high self-efficacy in female
leaders will improve performance and increase retention rates, which will lead to more females
in executive-level positions.
The Token Female
When executive-level women feel like the token women, they tend to have greater
pressure to perform, have feelings of isolation, and have difficulty finding their voice. As
mentioned earlier, at least 30% of a group must consist of nonconformists before the group
abandons the other label (Schrobsdorff, 2017). This ratio is referred to as the tipping point. A
token employee is one who is a part of a minority group, usually representing less than 15% of
an organization’s employees. Highly visible executive-level women may be subject to greater
performance pressure and to behave stereotypically; thus, they are particularly anxious to prevent
33

possible mistakes (Kanter, 1977). The tipping point theory suggests that when there are less than
15% of women on a team, they may feel scrutinized, which can constrain their ability to be
individuals with their own ideas (Schrobsdorff, 2017). This is understandable: in the hierarchy of
needs, belonging is just after food and shelter. When females are viewed as tokens in male-
dominated industries, discrimination is primarily due to the lack of awareness of the need to
create more accommodating workplace environments and to gender stereotyping (Steinfield &
Scott, 2018).
“Pull” of Personal Versus Professional Demands
Women in the workplace experience a confluence of pulls from their career ambitions
ranging from marriage, children, eldercare, spousal career support, and the inability to relocate.
Oftentimes, men do not contend with the same career pulls as women do, potentially giving them
a career advantage. Females who have earned an MBA have the lowest labor force participation
rates and the longest periods of job interruption when they have children, and they forfeit the
largest fraction of their income when they take time off (Goldin & Katz, 2011). Among these
MBA holders, mothers with high-earning spouses have labor force rates that are 18.5% lower
than with lesser-earning spouses (Goldin & Katz, 2011). Women face a strong pull from
children, eldercare, spousal career demands, and family relocation (Jones & Schneider, 2010).
Eighty-two percent of accompanying spouses in relocations were women of mobile dual-career
marriages (Jones & Schneider, 2010). Until the pull of females to manage both a full-time career
and the majority of domestic duties is addressed, it will be difficult for females to advance into
executive-level positions in the United States.

34

Expectancy-Value Theory
Expectancy-value theory presents a view of the impact influence cost has on the
subjective value of achievement tasks. The theory illustrates how cost influences individuals’
overall subjective value of achieving tasks and should be considered an influence on values
(Elliot et al., 2018). This theory is important to understand when considering the value female
leaders place on the factors that influence their career aspirations over time. Elliot et al. (2018)
proposed that achievement value is a function of three components: attainment value, the
importance of doing well, intrinsic value, the enjoyment gained by completing the task, and
utility value, how the task fits into an individual’s plans for the future. The cost influence refers
to the impact one activity has on another activity, how much effort it will take to accomplish the
activities, and the emotional cost (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). In a study evaluating how strongly
cost predicts outcomes in academic settings, Barron and Hulleman (2015) reported that students’
perception of cost predicted both their interest in the subject and their performance in terms of
grades. For purposes of this analysis, the focus was on psychological and social costs and efforts
required to complete a task. Individuals assess cost based on effort, if the perceived effort needed
to complete the task is worth it, psychological cost, the negative emotional consequences of
participating in the task and social cost, the potential impact of this task on the individual’s social
status (Elliot et al., 2018). Individuals then weigh the value created from the given task against
the detractive factors like costs to determine the overall subjective valuing of the achievement
task.
According to the Network of Executive Women (2018), attrition rates that are four times
higher than men in similar executive-level positions drive the underrepresentation of female
executive leaders. When the cost influences (i.e., obstacles) of a leaders’ career out weigh the
35

value generated by the career, the leader may decide to opt out. As an example, stereotype threat
is a situational predicament in which people are or feel themselves to be at risk of conforming to
social group stereotypes. Stereotype threat occurs when individuals fear that their social group is
devalued by others (Crocker & Major, 1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Repeated exposure to
certain images causes them to be internalized, implicitly accepted as true to the group and
perhaps to oneself (Steele, 2010). Stereotype threat can also create a social cost because women
who behave in ways counter to gender stereotypes may be faced with social backlash (von
Hippel et al., 2011b). Further, if a person who is underrepresented faces constant stereotype
threat, they may become stigmatized and disidentify themselves from the workplace (Steele &
Aronson, 1995). Female executive leaders under stereotype threat may disengage from the
potential consequences of their work performance, resulting in domain disidentification (Casad
& Bryant, 2016). Domain disidentification is a contributing factor to reducing career and
performance goals (Major & Schmader, 1998). Stereotype threat is just one example of the
obstacles female executives face throughout their careers. The effort required for female
executive leaders to overcome the compounding effect of these obstacles over time may offset
the value created by an executive career.
Conceptual Framework
The confluence of a lifetime of events across every level of Bronfenbrenner’s (1979)
ecological system influences females’ ability to attain and remain in executive-level leadership
positions. The literature highlights key obstacles influencing executive females across society,
institutions, and individually. The five levels of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system represent
the key obstacles highlighted in the literature review. An example of an obstacle in each level are
as follows:
36

• At the macrocultural level, gender bias is the tendency to prefer one gender over
another, which is present in society
• At the exosystem level, lack of access to adequate childcare and maternity leave
support
• At the mesosystem level, the lack of flexibility in the workplace may impact a female
executives’ ability to attain an executive-level leadership role
• At the microsystem level, the lack of female role models can lead to feelings of
isolation and a low sense of belonging
• At the individual level, the person is at the center of the interrelated systems that
influence one another (Bronfenbrenner, 1994)
The conceptual model in Figure 2 shows how the events across each level create obstacles over
time that erode female leaders’ aspiration to attain and remain in executive leadership positions.

Figure 2
Ecological System Conceptual Model

Note. Adapted from The ecology of human development by U. Bronfenbrenner, 1979, Harvard University Press. Copyright 1979 by
the President and Fellows of Harvard College.
a ro ul ural o e
Cultural Beliefs
Gender Stereotypes
ole Incongruency Theory
Gender Bias
os s e ns u onal
Maternal Career Barriers
Motherhood Penalty
Maternity Leave Policies
Wage iscrimination
Occupational Sex Segregation
Leaky Pipes
esos s e ns u onal n ual
Lack of Flexibility
Stereotype Threat
In group Bias Effect
Social Identity Theory
ros s e ns u onal n ual
Lack of Female ole Models
Token Female
e ale e u e n ual
Low Self efficacy
Pull of Personal vs . Professional emands
37
38

Conclusion
Women start out with similar or greater career aspirations as men, but after years of
experience, aspirations wane in part due to the lack of female role models (Wojcik, 2014). Over
time those aspirations wane. According to a study by Bain & Company, 43% of females aspire to
top management positions, but their aspiration levels over time decrease by more than 60% while
men’s stay the same (Coffman & Neuenfeldt, 2014). Additionally, 16% of educated, entry -level
females aspire to reach the top, but only 14% of those females believe it is worth the cost to get
to an executive-level position (Taneja et al., 2012).
When females finally do achieve the top spot, many opt out of the position. The few who
do make it to the executive level tend to opt out at a rate nearly four times faster than men.
Departure occurs despite being promoted at a similar rate to men (Network of Executive
Women, 2018). The compounding effect of obstacles faced over time deters females from
attaining and remaining in executive-level leadership positions. This literature review includes
22 examples of obstacles females may face throughout their professional careers. Females are
entering the workforce at the same rate as men with similar career ambitions, yet their aspirations
fade, and many of them opt out.

39

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the research methodology used to analyze the
research questions and address the underlying study, which explored the experiences of
executive females in the United States in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of
how female leaders explain their underrepresentation in executive-level positions. This approach
provided a deeper understanding of why female leaders in the United States are underrepresented
at the executive level despite their entering the workforce and being promoted at similar rates to
men. This chapter discusses a constructivist approach for this study in addition to the research
setting, my positionality, the data sources, participants, instrumentation, and data collection
procedures. This chapter also includes the methodology for analyzing the data and ethical
concerns.
Research Questions
The following questions were proposed to understand why female leaders are
underrepresented in executive leadership roles in the United States.
1. How do female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States describe their
experience?
2. What factors do female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States say
influenced their career aspirations over time?
Overview of Research Design
Given the need to explore and understand the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to
social or human problems, a qualitative approach is warranted (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Constructivism informs the research’s lens on the lack of female executive leaders by allowing
the participants to construct meaning as they engage with the world and to make sense of it based
40

on their historical and social perspectives (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). I sought to understand
the context and setting of the participants and recognize how my own experiences and
background impact the interpretation of the findings. Therefore, the design of inquiry is a
narrative research design from the humanities in which the researcher studies the lives of
individuals (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Qualitative Research Setting
The goal was to recruit 10 participants in this study that are currently or formerly female
leaders who worked at an S&P 500 company during their career. Five participants had fewer
than 15 years of work experience and five had greater than 15 years of work experience. The
participants were selected via purposeful sampling to ensure saturation, which is when the data
and emerging findings become repetitive and no new information surfaces as you collect more
data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interviews were 60 minutes long, conducted over a Zoom, a
teleconferencing platform. The interviewer and the interviewee were in separate locations. The
interviews were recorded with the permission of the interviewee utilizing the Zoom transcript.
Data was collected from the participants over a 3-month timeframe.
The Researcher
I am a female executive leader in an S&P 500 company in the United States. I spent over
20 years leading large organizations in the consumer-packaged goods industry in both public and
privately held companies. I experienced many of the obstacles females face throughout their
lives and during their professional careers. These experiences shaped my leadership style to one
of situational leadership with a strong preference for servant leadership. I empathize with
employees who had socioeconomic challenges or who faced bias, sexual harassment, or racial
prejudice. I work hard to ensure everyone has a seat at the table and their voice is heard, which is
41

a critical component to creating an inclusive and diverse culture. As Sherbin and Rashid (2017)
said, diversity without inclusion is a story of missed opportunities, of employees so used to being
overlooked that they no longer share ideas and insights. I want to help others succeed because I
understand how difficult it is to overcome these obstacles. I try to understand what barriers may
be holding female leaders back and help them break through.
My positionality has allowed me to witness female executive leaders opting in while
others opted out. As a female executive leader who can advocate for others, it is important to
learn directly from participants. I recognize that my experiences may differ from the participants
and ensured the interview questions were not leading or biased. I also took notes about my
personal experience, written as memos, during the research to reflect on the process and assist
with developing codes and themes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). This is referred to as reflexive
thinking (Creswell, 2016). Additionally, I recognize and accept that every human has bias
(Mieres, 2017). Recognizing one’s own bias is a strategy to mitigate these influences. I am in a
position to advocate for women to move into executive leadership positions, and I have the
ability to directly affect change in an S&P 500 company, the consumer-packaged goods industry,
and beyond. I designed the questions and framed the scope. The results will be disseminated to
the participants, USC, and interested parties.
Participants
Participants were selected via purposive sampling, specifically a unique sample, which
relies on the researcher’s judgment to select a group that focuses on particular characteristics of a
population being researched (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The underlying logic of the sampling
theory is a single-stage sampling procedure because the researchers have access to the population
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The sample population was stratified, which required that
42

characteristics of the population members be known to ensure specific characteristics are
represented, allowing for the collection of the intended data from a subgroup within the
population with a limited amount of time, resources, and budget (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
The specific characteristics for the populations sampled were female, race, years of experience,
and an undergraduate degree. Women of Color represented 30% of the participants. The
participants were recruited via email or LinkedIn and presented with a cover letter that shares the
purpose, the researchers’ background and positionality , and request for a video interview. The
interviews addressed the two research questions, providing a deeper understanding of why
female leaders in the United States are underrepresented at the executive level despite females
entering the workforce and being promoted at rates similar to men.
Instrumentation
This study used interviews with a mix of open-ended and close-ended questions.
Interviewing allows a researcher to enter into the inner world of another person and to gain an
understanding of that person’s perspective (Patton, 1987). The research was conducted using
semi-structured interviews focused on examining the research questions but flexible enough to
allow for adjusting the planned questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interview began with
an open-ended question about how they believe society in the United States supports female
leaders in general and then how the United States supports family leave. These two questions are
key concepts related to this study identified in the macrocultural level of Bronfenbrenner’s
(1979) ecological system.
The interview then went more in depth to ask how the interviewee’s career was or was
not supported by their parents , addressing the microsystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) . The
following questions focus ed on the mesosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) in terms of the
43

participant’s familial responsibilities, personal and professional sacrifices, potential tension
between personal and professional life , and any obstacles that hindered their career progression.
The remaining questions focus ed on the individual experiences and support participants received
through role models or executive level coaches. The interview s ended with an open ended
question regarding the interviewees’ satisfaction with their professional career s. After each
interview, I transcribed the interviews and analyze d the narr ative for common themes and
inconsistencies. Appendix A contains the interview instrument that was used to collect data from
the participants .
Data Collection Procedures
I selected interview candidates through a review of professional contacts, LinkedIn
profiles, and members of the Network of Executive Women, a not-for-profit organization that is
a professional community committed to advancing women in the workplace. I contacted
interview candidates via email four weeks prior to conducting the interview. Included in the
email was an introduction to the background and purpose of the study as well as of the
interviewer. The informed consent for research and the email requesting the interview clearly
state that participation in the research study is strictly voluntary, there is no obligation to
participate. Participant rights related to not answering some questions or discontinuing their
participation was also presented via the informed consent form. After confirmation of their
interest and ensuring they met the research criteria interviews were scheduled based on the
availability of the participant. No compensation was offered to the participants. All data was
collected via Zoom and stored on my computer with the appropriate safeguards.

44

Data Analysis
The overall approach to qualitative interview data analysis began with the collection of
interview data. I simultaneously collected the data while writing up findings from prior
interviews. The data collected during qualitative research is so rich that it must be winnowed
(Guest et al., 2012), a process of eliminating parts of the data and focusing on other parts. Once
the data were winnowed, they were aggregated into themes, and five to seven themes are
recommended (Creswell, 2013). Once the themes were identified, the data were coded. An
example of a code is belongingness which served as an umbrella for four open codes; boys club,
lack of belongingness, bring one’s whole self to work and feeling included. A qualitative
software program was used to code, enabling efficient and effective storing, and organizing,
searching specific codes, identifying interrelated codes, and the ability to import and export data
to quantitative programs for analysis (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The ability to leverage
interrelated codes to make queries of the relationship among codes allows for an examination of
the impact the different environments identified using the ecological system have on females
throughout their lifetime and how the evolving interactions between the environments impact
females. I leveraged the eight steps used in forming codes by Tesch (1990). After the data were
coded, they were summarized, compared to the literature reviewed, conclusions were drawn, and
research limitations and recommendations for future research were shared.
Validity and Reliability
Creswell and Miller (2000) stated that qualitative validity is based on the determination
of the accuracy of the findings from the perspective of the researcher, the participant, or the
readers. Qualitative validity is when the researcher checks for accuracy by following certain
procedures, differing from qualitative reliability, which checks that the researcher’s approach is
45

consistent across different researchers (Gibbs, 2007). I employed multiple validity procedures,
such as clarifying the bias I bring to the study, providing a rich description of the findings, and
offering more than one perspective about the themes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The three strategies that enhance credibility are adequate engagement in data collection,
member checks, and triangulation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I ensured saturation by sampling
enough participants, soliciting feedback on the preliminary findings from some of them, and
utilizing interviews, observations, and documents for data collection. The structure of the open-
and close-ended interview questions, the number of participants, how the participants were
recruited, and the approach to analyzing the data ensured the research output is credible. Each
interviewee’s professional and educational background was reviewed along with personal
references, when available. Lastly, the data were triangulated. Denzin (1978) proposes four types
of triangulation: (a) multiple methods, (b) multiple sources of data, (c) multiple investigations,
and (d) multiple theories to confirm emerging findings. Multiple methods were used by
confirming data collected during the interviews with observation on-line (i.e., LinkedIn profile)
or from personal references. Multiple sources were used to enhance credibility by cross-checking
the data collected through the interviews, perhaps having a follow-up interview with the same
person to verify findings, confirm understanding of their responses or by having another person
independently analyze the same qualitative data and compare their findings (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). A point of saturation and credibility was reached when the data became redundant and no
new information was received.

46

Ethics
It is important to address ethical issues prior to conducting the study, throughout the
study, during the data collection and analysis, and in the reporting, storing, and sharing of the
data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The participants were provided an information sheet. All data
were strictly confidential, and verbatim transcripts were approved by the participant prior to
inclusion in the research. The study proposal was reviewed by the institutional review board, and
I complied with the university’s code of ethics.
Underlying Ethics
The goal of this study was to explore the experiences of executive females in the United
States and to examine why they are underrepresented in executive-level positions. By gaining a
deeper understanding of the participants’ challenges, they can be addressed by the participants,
the companies that employ them, and the industries that support them. The participants could be
harmed if the information they shared could be used to retaliate against them or if individuals in
leadership positions perceive the information as biased. This was addressed by using
pseudonyms for the participants and their companies and by offering the participant the choice to
skip or stop answering questions at any time.

47

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of executive females in S&P
500 companies in the United States and to examine why they are underrepresented in executive-
level positions. Given the need to explore and understand the meaning individuals or groups
ascribe to social or human problems, a qualitative approach is warranted (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). Constructivism informs the research’s lens on the lack of female executive leaders by
allowing the participants to construct meaning as they engage with the world and make sense of
it based on their historical and social perspectives (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
I sought to understand the context and setting of the participants and recognized how my
experiences and background affected the interpretation of the findings. Therefore, the design of
inquiry is a narrative research design from the humanities in which the researcher studies
individuals’ lives (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). I proposed the following questions to understand
why female leaders are underrepresented in executive leadership roles in the United States.
1. How do female leaders at S&P 500 companies in the United States describe their
experience?
2. What factors do female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States say
influenced their career aspirations over time?
Description of the Participants
I interviewed 10 current or former female leaders who worked at an S&P 500 company in
the United States during their careers. The interview took place between October 2021 and
January 2022. Five participants had fewer than 15 years of work experience, and five had greater
than 15 years of work experience. I used pseudonyms for their names and their companies to
protect their privacy. Table 1 shows participants’ years of work experience , race, and
48

background. Given the relevance of intersectionality, I intentionally sought a racially diverse
participant pool. Thirty percent of the participants were Women of Color, two African-American
and one Asian-American.

Table 1
Years of Work Experience, Race and Background of Interview Participants
Pseudonym Background Years of
experience
Race
Lauren Lauren was a vice president at one of the world’s
largest investment banking firms. She is married
with two children and managed a dual career
household. She opted out of her career several
years ago and is now considering a “second act.”
Greater
than 15
White
Elizabeth Elizabeth spent her career in the consumer
packaged goods industry. She was a vice
president of human resources at a major global
company when she opted out to become an
executive coach.
Greater
than 15
African-
American
Cheryl Cheryl is a senior vice president at a prominent
technology company. She is married with three
children and her husband sold his business to
stay home with their children and support her
career.
Greater
than 15
White
Lori Lori is a C-suite executive at a pharmaceutical
company. She spent the majority of her career in
consumer packaged goods in various cross
functional experiences. She is married with two
children and manages a dual career household.
Greater
than 15
African-
American
Ann Ann was a C-suite executive at a major global
consumer packaged goods company. She is
married with one child. She recently opted to
take time off from her career.
Greater
than 15
White
Joy Joy is a marketing manager at a privately held
company. She spent the majority of her career in
public consumer product goods companies. She
is married with a new born baby and manages a
dual career household.
Fewer
than 15
White
49

Pseudonym Background Years of
experience
Race
Julie Julie is a manager at a major global consumer
packaged goods company. She was in a
leadership development program which
accelerated her career advancement. She was
recently married and manages a dual career
household. She is planning to start a family
soon.
Fewer
than 15
White
Daniella Daniella is a sales and marketing professional at a
major global consumer packaged goods
company. She was recently married and
manages a dual career household. She is
planning to start a family soon.
fewer than
15
White
Diane Diane is a marketing manager at a major global
consumer packaged goods company. She has
successfully progressed through sales and
marketing roles with increased responsibilities.
She was recently married and manages a dual
career household.
fewer than
15
Asian-
American
Maria Maria is a senior manager at a major US retailer.
She has spent the majority of her career in retail.
She is married and manages a dual career
household.
fewer than
15
White

Research Findings Pertaining to Research Question 1
Six findings emerged with respect to Research Question 1: How do female leaders in
S&P 500 companies in the United States describe their experience? The findings were (a) society
views female leaders positively but challenges remain, (b) the lack of a sense of belonging, (c)
gender stereotypes, (d) gender bias in performance evaluations, (e) challenges of being a
working mother, and (f) the pull of personal demands against professional ones.
Society Views Female Leaders Positively but Challenges Remain
When asked how society views female executive leaders, five participants believed that
society wants more females in executive-level positions and that society is proud of the progress
50

female leaders have made in the United States. Five participants were encouraged by how much
society talks about diversity, inclusion, and equity, they believed society is supportive of the idea
of more female executive leaders, and they believed companies are genuinely trying to improve
female executive leadership representation. Ann stated, “ Society wants to see more women in the
C-Suite and the executive wing of the company.” Lauren mentioned, “ Society views female
leaders extremely positively and as extremely desirable. The realities of what people think that
means are lined up with the idea of more female leaders being a positive goal.” Julie said,
I think it depends on what society views women as, but also what family dynamics you
grow up in. So, I think society is pushing visually recently and when I say recently, it’s
like 10–15 years or even less than that, that this is an equal playing field. You need to get
50/50 in these executive positions. And there’s a push for that.
Daniella highlighted the progress that has been made: “It’s still not reflective of, let’s call
it the U.S. population, but that gap’s been making a lot of progress, so I also like to pause and
recognize. Yes, there’s been progress.”
While five participants believed that U.S. society supports increasing the representation
of female leaders into executive-level roles and that some progress has been in female
representation in S&P 500 companies, two participants highlighted the challenges exist to
achieving equality. Diane stated, “ I feel like society loves the idea of it, and they are very
supportive of having more representation and things like equal pay and equal opportunity. The
challenge is actually executing it.” Julie mentioned,
We are making change to women in executive leadership roles. But I think it’s the
psychology and the mindset that’s going to take a lot of time, and it’s going to take a lot
of education and a lot of teaching to really get us where we want to be.
51

Lauren mentioned, “ I think people have the idea that a woman is great but yet there’s certain
things that because we’ve always viewed leaders as men that still persist in kind of that
unconscious bias world.”
Four participants believe society views male and female leaders differently. Cheryl
shared “ I still think they view them [male versus female leaders] different, the stereotype
continues to be perpetuated.” Julie added “women are held to a much higher standard [then
men]” and Elizabeth said “there is still a perception that women leaders are secondary to male
leaders. There is a greater level of tolerance for female leaders in corporations.”
Three participants expressed concern that female executive leaders are merely a “check
the box exercise” b ecause organizations are receiving social pressure to ensure they have at least
one female executive on the team. Joy said, “ I feel people look at them as token now. They’re
the example. They have a female leader on their board or something that. It’s a box check
sometimes.” Daniella added, “ I think people view them almost as a token or a box to check, a
medal to be won. So, trying to hit a number. Plain and simple.” Maria stated,
When you really look at it from a macro level and look at the gaps that we see, the
conversations that I’m prone to hear about when we talk about succession planning when
we think about the future, I think there’s times where society views executive women as
the diamond in the rough, meaning they’re the one that got there.
When managers focus on “checking the box” they run the risk of moving female leaders
into roles without investing in their development. One participant mentioned witnessing a female
leader who did not have the right developmental experiences, support, or feedback and was
moved into a leadership role ahead of her capabilities, which resulted in her exiting the company
within 6 months.
52

When female executive leaders feel like the token woman, they tend to have greater
pressure to perform, feel isolated and lonely, and have difficulty finding their voice. Lori stated,
I was saddened that they hadn’t realized that [I was the only one] and were supportive. It
just was a validation of my loneliness. I clearly was lonely and … it didn’t even dawn on
them. It wasn’t something that they had to necessarily think about or worry about, and
it’s lonely because you think, “well, the odds are stacked against me.”
Ann said, “ My whole career. It was really like that for a long time. I didn’t think anything of it. It
became so normal for me to be the only woman, and in those situations, I don’t think necessarily,
I’m not thinking about what my gender is. I’m just there to sort of make a difference and have an
impact.”
Lori added,
And I knew that not only because I was a woman, but because I was a black woman and
there just weren’t any of me at the level anywhere. The numbers are really, really slim.
Yeah, so I was always the only [woman].
Lastly, Diane said, “ There are not a lot of Asian females in corporate.”
When the participants described how society views female executive-level leaders in the
United States five of the participants believe female leaders are viewed favorably, two of the
participants highlight that challenges still exist to execute a strategy that enables the equal
representation of female leaders, four of the participants believe that female leaders are held to
higher standards than male leaders and three participants believed that female leaders are a
“check the box” exercise.

53

The Lack of a Sense of Belonging
Every participant shared a story about lacking a sense of belonging as a female leader in
the United States. Five participants explicitly referred to the boys club or fraternity at work,
which lacked inclusivity, leading to feelings of loneliness. Being a part of a group can create a
sense of belonging and increase self-esteem. However, when individuals are not a part of a
group, they can feel isolated, discriminated against, and prejudged. Cheryl said, “I wasn’t part of
the boys club, and now it’s back filled by somebody who was in the boys club.”
Two participants described events and outings that were exclusive to men, at times
including customers, that left out women on the team. Elizabeth stated,
I became aware of the fact that there were two district managers who ran the office.
[They] hosted a golf outing, a weekend trip, where guys in the office went away on this
golf outing weekend. And this is something they did every year, and I was shocked. Is
that not an advantage for all of them to spend quality time with you guys every year and
when it’s time for promotions, when you decide on where the extra little pot of money is
going to go, how is that not a disadvantage to the women on this team?
The participants shared that the lack of belonging and feelings of isolation and exclusion drove
low career satisfaction, leading three participants to quit their jobs in search of a new company
that offered a greater sense of belonging. Lori said,
It was hard for me to deal with the fact that not only was I a woman, but I was African
American woman, and typically, I was the only one in a space. And so, it was lonely.
Most times, I didn’t feel like I belonged. I would feel completely alone.
Table 2 shows a sample of participants’ statements about the lack of belonging at their
companies.
54

Table 2
The Lack of Belonging
A lack of belonging was a common theme among participants.
But as a whole, it was definitely a boys club that I didn’t necessarily want to be a part
of it, which is why I left.
I really struggled to connect with most of the men on my team. Within a week of him
[my male backfill] joining, he was invited to go to Florida to golf with the guys.
Yes, I can do those things, but why would I stay here and do those things? Why
wouldn’t I go someplace where I actually felt like I was part of a team and I
connected?
That despite feeling like I have great relationships with individuals, my overall sense of
belonging is not here, which is ultimately why I left.
Since I showed up, I didn’t belong. I just didn’t find that it was a luxury for me to care
I’m not part of the fraternity here. There’s still pockets where a group I was a part of
when I joined it almost felt like a fraternity.

Participants said that when they lack a sense of belonging, they are not comfortable
bringing their whole selves to work, creating additional obstacles to their advancement.
Participants described intentionally showing up as a different person at work than outside of
work, which drove unhappiness and exhaustion due to trying to maintain two different personas.
Participants described showing up as a different person as the inability to be who they are in a
professional setting from how they prefer to dress, to style their hair, to speak and repressed
personality traits out of fear of being judged. They intentionally conformed to the professional
expectations set by the cultural norms of their company and their teams. This led them to show
up as a different person than they are outside the office, hence, unable to bring their whole self to
work. Lauren stated, “ I would joke that I was Clark Kent and Superman, and I would go into the
booth and become a different person when I would get there.” Cheryl stated,
55

Normally, I do that very well [keep personal and professional identities separate]. It’s
because I have a separation of church and state, so I have a switch where I’m either at
work or I’m mom. Walk in through a threshold and then you’re back into different into a
hat.
Ann stated,
I was at work, and then I was at home, and the two people were really different, but the
reality was it wasn’t that effective, and it was also very exhausting. Try to be this
different person, so it’s interesting. I thought I was doing it for everyone else, but when I
started [being myself,] I felt so much happier because I actually love the people I work
with and really enjoy them, and I’m so happy when you can be a little bit more personal.
Lori said,
I’ve always lived in a duality of culture. So, it was easier for me to be fluid. But it’s all
still a lot of energy and work. It came a little bit more natural for me because of always
having lived in multiple cultures, but it still takes a lot of energy.
One participant felt a great sense of belonging at their peer level but not with the
executive level leaders. Joy mentioned,
The sense of belonging came down to the micro-culture. There was never a great sense of
belonging at a macro-cultural level. I did not feel like I belonged at a high-level
company, sort of bird’s eye view, but when it came to immediate peers, there was a sense
of belonging there.
The ability to show up as one’s whole self was an important factor in participants’ job
satisfaction, performance, and retention. Cheryl said,
56

I want to be able to add value. It’s because I can be my best self and that I can be
holistically who I am there and that people appreciate me for who I am versus trying to
have me be somebody that I’m not. To be able to drive results. Let’s align on what the
results are that we’re going to do and then give me the responsibility and accountability
and the tools to go hit it right. So, it’s completely fine with taking that, but the belonging
is a big deal because if I don’t feel connection to people. I was leaving because I don’t
want to stay someplace where I don’t feel like I’m being me. It’s very simple.
When participants felt a sense of belonging they had increased career satisfaction and
tenure with the organization. Two participants felt supported and valued and that their talent was
recognized. Julie stated,
People are so very personable, so I felt a sense of belonging, and I’ve also felt that for the
most part, I’ve been recognized, and my talents and my focus and everything I’ve done
has been appreciated. So that helps, too, for the most part. I do feel a sense of belonging
and family.
Maria said,
I’m heard. I feel valued. I feel welcomed. [That] is the reason that I feel comfortable
doing some of the things that can be more difficult that sometimes other folks may throw
the rag in if they don’t have that sense of “I do belong here” that I feel. And I feel
fortunate to have that.
When participants had a strong sense of belonging they were highly engaged, committed,
and productive. They felt comfortable bringing their whole self to work, that their voices were
heard and their contributions were valued. These participants expressed high career satisfaction
and tended to stay with their companies. Conversely, when participants did not have a strong
57

sense of belonging the opposite happened. They did not feel included, they did not feel supported
and they did not feel valued. Eventually they left their position, their company or they opted out
of their career all together. The mental and physical stress resulting from the loneliness and
isolation built over time.
Gender Stereotypes
Participants observed other senior-level women acting like men and gave examples of
situations where they conformed to the dominant culture in their attire and behavior. The
participants described a system that was built by men with established leadership expectations
and norms associated with male attributes. When the participants displayed strong leadership
skills that were typically ascribed to men they oftentimes received backlash because of the
misalignment of expectations driven by gender stereotypes.
About perceptions of leaders as male, Lauren mentioned, “ I think people have the idea
that a woman is great but yet there’s certain things that because we’ve always viewed leaders as
men that still persist in kind of that unconscious bias world.” Joy said, “When I say, ‘my boss’
and people respond with ‘he, him, his’ verbs, and you’re, ‘Oh, it’s actually a girl.’ Oh, they’re a
female leader. It’s, well, they’re not just a leader.” Ann said, “ Even when I did 360s, or I did
executive coaching, it was interesting for me because oftentimes I would be described as having
male traits.”
Three participants shared being penalized for displaying leadership traits or behaviors not
expected of female leaders. Lori said, “ If you’re a mom they aren’t necessarily the same
penalties that men experience, there might be some penalties if you’re competitive and
aggressive.” Ann stated, “ I think that the challenges that were still held to sort of these archaic
beliefs about how women are supposed to behave.” Lastly, Lori stated, “ So, this guy can go there
58

and be rewarded for his candor. But I am clearly being punished for mine, and it is just so
frustrating.”
To avoid the penalties and be successful many executive-level female leaders choose to
act like men. According to Lori,
The kind of approach they appeared to have to take with their career, which was you had
to think and operate and play like the culture. Which was dominated by males, and so a
lot of the women that I met were, I think, maybe a bit more aggressive and hardened and
felt as though they needed to be that way to be successful.
Participants struggled with the burden of status incongruity, which proposes that women
who possess or pursue power are de facto status incongruent. When women display male-
dominated traits that are often associated with success in leadership roles, they tend to be
disliked, discriminated against, and perceived differently than women in general. Ann said,
Are we too soft or are we too hard, you know? All of the things that we’ve been saddled
with our whole career in her whole life. I think that there’s an expectation on the roles
that we play in work in life that’s still spill over into our professional life, so I think it’s
really challenging.
Lauren mentioned,
I think that’s why some of the senior women that I didn’t respect and didn’t admire, they
overcompensated by being over the top with what they thought was projecting
confidence. I even had a conversation with one woman about it, and she had no idea she
was coming off like that.
Cultural stereotypes have created an expectation of how males and females should
behave in the workplace. Leadership continues to be depicted in male traits or behaviors
59

resulting in participants being described as having male traits, conforming to male behaviors, or
being penalized for showing up different from the archaic beliefs of how women are supposed to
behave. Participants witnessed executive-level female leaders conforming to traditional male
stereotypes in behaviors, attire, and communication skills. At times, they themselves conformed
to the male stereotype leadership behaviors, which was the dominant culture in their workplace,
because they believed that was the only way to be successful. The weight of gender stereotypes
built over time leading participants to experience loneliness, mental and physical stress, and
career dissatisfaction.
Gender Bias in Performance Evaluations
Participants pointed out bias in performance evaluations as a reason it took them longer
to be promoted than their male counterparts. Performance evaluations are typically conducted
twice a year based on a set standard, concluding with a formal annual performance rating which
is used to determine annual compensation and promotional readiness. Participants believe gender
bias in performance evaluation is a contributor to the under-representation of executive-level
female leaders.
A common theme from participants was the expectation or perceived expectation that
female leaders need to do more to prove themselves, which contributes to why female leaders
take longer to achieve executive-level roles. Ann said,
Everyone who’s evaluating us also has that same bias. And they say OK, well, has she
really done this? And now that I’m in the room, I see that same conversation playing out
right when we’re evaluating succession plans. We always are more apt to lean in on the
male candidate despite the fact that they could have equal performance and equal scores
60

in terms of leadership. It’s just like we need the woman to do one more thing just to make
sure she can handle right the intensity of what it means to be at our best.
Joy mentioned, “ There’s men who have done OK and have been given an OK review and then
women who have been OK and given poor reviews.”
Typically, people move people based on the personal biases of the people who have the
decision to make on whether or not you’re going to move to the next level. And if there’s
nobody that looks like they may have had similar experiences to me or looks like there
may be somebody else there that could relate to my experience, my chances may be
pretty low.
Ann wondered, “ Why is it taking me so long to get to where I know I should be? Think about
how many more experiences we’ve all had to have [female leaders] to get that seat.”
Four participants shared stories of feeling like they were penalized for mistakes that
resulted in career setbacks. Female leaders focus on not making mistakes, so they take fewer
risks, lack self-efficacy, and apply unnecessary stress on themselves. Julie said, “ There’s just this
much higher fear to fail.”
That could be that one bad day which could impact me for the next 5 years because
people are like “We gotta show us that you can handle this conversation and you can be
welcoming to people or you can hold your positions lightly, or we think you’re too
aggressive”. But part of it was culture and not being comfortable with women having an
opinion and a strong opinion.
Lori stated,
“I think men don’t have to think about that kind of thing. The room is full of them, so
why wouldn’t they because there’s tons of men to show that this is a space for them,
61

right? That thought process and then the mental kind of additional stress and baggage that
you carry along with those inner thoughts doesn’t exist in many ways for them. So, that
impacts how you engage, how you interact, what you’re willing to take risk on, what
you’re not willing to take risk on, what you’re willing to put yourself out there for or not
because you do this calculation in your head all the time [figuring out] what the impact
could be, and for a woman, and particularly women of color, a setback is significant and
can be damaging for years to come.
Three participants shared the pressure to always prove yourself or have greater
performance pressure. Ann said,
You know you got to be A-game every day. I think when you are extended that support
when maybe you’re not expecting the level, you feel that much more, that you need to go
above and beyond even more, and that’s what’s exhausting.
Joy mentioned, “ It’s more permissible as a male leader to have balance. Then I do feel it is for
females who are constantly trying to prove their worth in the position.”
When participants received negative feedback or were not being supported into higher
levels of more challenging responsibilities, they started doubting their abilities, and their career
ambitions waned. Joy said, “ I got a mediocre year-end review or whatever it is and you slowly
become who people are telling you are.” Lori stated, “There’s so much that I can give. I had
maybe spent so much time At the same company and with the same people giving me the same
feedback that at some point you start, you know, believe in it.”
Gender biased performance evaluations are contributing to the under-representation of
female executive-level leaders. Participants experienced being held accountable to higher
expectations than their male counterparts which led to men getting promoted quicker or
62

receiving better performance evaluations for equal output. Participants feared receiving greater
penalties for mistakes so they took fewer risks and applied unnecessary stress on themselves.
Over time, the additional stress participants placed on themselves, the disenchantment with
stifled career progression and the constant need to prove ones capabilities over and over, led to
frustration and exhaustion.
Challenges of Being a Working Mother
All participants stated that the United States does not offer strong family leave support.
Participants believed that this was a career obstacle either for themselves or other female leaders
in the United States. Table 3 shows a sample of participants’ statements in response to the
question “Do you believe the United States offers strong family leave support?”

Table 3
Familial Leave Support in the United States
Participant Sample statement to the question, “Do you believe the United States offers
strong family leave support?”
Lauren No, we don’t.
Ann I don’t.
Joy No, and I need to pay attention to the maternity leave policy because the
United States will not be protecting me in any sort of way.
Cheryl The US as a whole. No, I don’t think so. Old thinking from 20 to 30 years
ago that females are normally home versus in the workforce and I just
don’t think that those policies have been refreshed to reflect the realities of
today.
Lori Uhm, no.
Elizabeth No, the answer is no.
Julie It doesn’t.
Daniella I don’t think we’re there yet.
Diane No. And when we finally started asking at our respective workplaces what is
the coverage I found out that my company gives FMLA. That’s it.
Maria I don’t. I think that’s a big gap.
63

Five of the participants had children, two of the participants were pregnant with their first
child at the time of the interview and three did not have children. When asked if the United
States offered strong maternity leave support, all 10 participants said no. Four of the five
participants that had children cited that the lack of a strong maternity leave policy, the additional
responsibilities of being a mother and the bias they faced in the workplace once starting a family
either had a negative impact on their careers or contributed to them to reducing their career
aspirations. Joy described only receiving 4 weeks from the company’s maternity leave policy and
having to negotiate an additional 6 weeks of paid time off:
They ended up saying they cannot revise my maternity leave. I was crushed. I ended up
turning down the offer because I was that confident that I was not working for a company
that can't support me. This is so unfair.
Cheryl shared her in-vitro fertilization journey as being “horrific” at one of her
companies: “None of my services were paid for, and I only received 12 weeks of leave, but that
was it, and that was for twins and for going through a surrogate process.”
Daniella shared that having adequate familial leave is so important that she is prioritizing
the companies maternity leave policy over financial incentives when seeking new employment:
More and more we are making the decision not just based on the fact that you might get a
30% bonus at the end of the year, but something that’s a sure thing, we’re going to
uphold 3–4 months maternity leave no matter what, five months, whatever it might be.
Participants described disadvantages they suffered as a result of having children while
working. Joy described her inability to accept a job offer for a promotion because of the
inadequate maternity leave policy the company offered: “This could have been a huge
steppingstone for my career, and I’m not taking it because I can’t get to a good place on
64

maternity [leave policy].” She also explained that this was a conversation her spouse never had
to have with his company, putting her at a disadvantage to men.
Lauren described senior leaders’ perception of her career commitment after having a
baby:
I think that many people, with the best of intentions in their minds, had the same
perception, and I was not assertive enough in articulating that wasn’t what I wanted
because I was also still a little bit afraid of seeming like this bad mother who has a baby
and then says no I don’t want to spend time with the baby. That wasn’t actually what I
was saying, but that’s kind of how it would come out.
Four participants described the need to focus on starting a family, which was challenging
while managing their careers. Daniella mentioned, “ In this critical stage of your life, when
you’re building a family, when there’s just this pause, there’s this moot point that has to happen
for your family.” Julie shared her and her husbands’ decision to changes jobs to relocate closer to
family to help support them as they begin a family of their own “ There are definitely sacrifices
because you have to plan ahead for that [having a family], which was a huge part of why we
moved back.”
Several participants described the need to hide the fact that they were mothers out of fear
that their career ambitions would be questioned. Lauren described the need to always be on call
to ensure her dedication to her career was not questioned, which was a behavior that the few
female executive leaders that had children exhibited. She said, “ Women were taking calls from
the maternity ward because they didn’t want to be seen as being out of the game.” Lauren also
noted,
65

There was this perception like you were there, but you weren’t as committed after having
children. The perception was different at work. I didn’t even put up pictures of my kids in
the office. I had one in my desk drawer that when the kids or my spouse came by, I
would take it out and put it on the desk. Women either had their kids when they reached a
senior level, had a stay-at-home, spouse, or had no children.
Lori shared that her and her husband intentionally waited to start a family so she can
attain a certain professional level because she believed that her career progression would be
negatively impacted once they had a child “ So it was about 10 years after we met before we had
our first child and both of us were a dual career household and I think that was because I
perceived that my career might slow down by having a child.”
Several participants described difficulty managing through the tough family years,
highlighting that most of the men they worked with had stay-at-home spouses that helped care
for the children and run the household. Lauren said,
Most of the men I worked with had wives who didn’t work, and the wives also had
nannies, so it was sort of like if you’re dedicated to this job, you subcontract everything
at home, and I think that perception and possible reality for years. I think that contributed
significantly to why we consistently lock women in the early management years because
those are also the really tough family years. And there were a lot of people who weren’t
like me who weren’t willing to say I’m going to put my career ahead of my kids, and they
would just say, “This is unsustainable. I can’t do it” and leave.
All participants, even those who did not have children, described the United States as
lacking familial leave support. Participants chose to have children after certain career milestones
were achieved so they had more resources and because they were concerned about being able to
66

achieve those career milestones after having children. In some cases participants downplayed
being a mother out of fear of bias in the workplace. Participants with fewer than 15 years of
work experience shared concerns as they watched executive-level female leaders navigate career
obstacles, choose to either have children later in life, downplay being a mother in the workplace
or sacrifice a significant amount of time away from their family. Despite early ambitions to
pursue both a successful career and have a family, women are either having no children, are
having fewer children later in life, are opting out of the workplace to have children, or are
choosing to become under-employed when they start a family. Over time, the challenges of being
a working mother in the United States eroded career ambitions, especially for the participants
with fewer than 15 years of work experience.
The Pull of Personal Demands Against Professional Ones
Every participants shared examples of tension between their professional and personal
lives. They mentioned raising children, caring for older parents and other family members, and
taking on more of the family and domestic responsibilities. They also shared the challenging
years of middle management when they are beginning to start a family, which results in the
confluence of two major life stages. Ann said,
Oftentimes we get to manager, and we’re just beginning a family. Then you’ve got to
raise a family, and then it’s off to college, and by that point, you know we’re sandwich
generation, taking care of our older parents. So, I tend to think that women take on more
not because we’re martyrs. It’s because there’s something innate. There’s more of a trait I
think toward caregiving, and we don’t like to relinquish anything.
Daniella stated,
67

Right now my number one priority is finding the right home for the right cost in the right
environment for my child. In this critical stage of your life, when you’re building a
family, when there is just this pause, there’s this moot point that has to happen for yo ur
family.
The demands of work and, at times, the lack of flexibility of project deadlines and
management’s expectations create a situation for some female leaders to feel overwhelmed and
conflicted. Lauren shared feedback that her manager expected her to be available at all times,
and if she were not, there would be consequences to her career: “If you’re not there to take a call
when someone needs you on a weekend, it’s no problem. We just won’t call.”
Participants reflected on the number of times they choose professional demands over
personal ones, often times at the expense of their own self-care. Cheryl stated,
That’s a function probably of I’m continuing to rise in a large organization, and that’s
probably also just a function of the time that we’re in at the moment. That’s definitely a
tension that I feel because that’s not something that I want to be doing. I need to breathe,
and I don’t have the chance to do that anymore.
The push and pull of personal versus professional demands led some participants to feel
like they were not succeeding in either aspect of their lives. Lauren, who ultimately opted out of
a very successful career shared, “Not succeeding in either realm of m y life and always wanting
to be able to give more to both, and I probably always leaned on the side of, if I had to make a
choice, I would choose work.”
Lori shared the challenge of ramping down her level of professional intensity to focus on
her family when time permitted: “That’s what the trick for work life balance has been. To be
68

honest, I can always ramp it up, the hardest part for me, was giving myself permission to ramp it
down when it wasn’t necessary for me to be on.”
Three participants figured out how to create separation and prioritization that works for
them and their companies. Joy said,
We [her spouse] are really good at it, too, and so we’re very compartmentalized with
work. When the day is over, and we close our computer it’s done. We don’t talk about
work really, and I don’t sign on after she [her daughter] goes to bed or after. I don’t sign
on after I make dinner or something unless it’s super critical, and I think I did a good job
starting at Company X having lunch every day.
Cheryl mentioned,
My weekends are for kids. My weekends are for family, and I need to disengage on that
[work], and I do. I am also very good about taking [paid time off] and when I do take [it]
then I’m also good at going off the grid so. That’s how I’ve managed.
Lauren stated,
I think the idea of work-life balance, and, you know, a lot of people talk about this is sort
of a misnomer. For me, it’s more integration and making them coexist together or trying
to create a life where they can exist together and exist well.
Nonetheless, other participants struggled to obtain balance Daniella said,
There really wasn’t balance. It was just separation. I had the professional switch all the
way up and pretty much everything else down, everything, and it wasn’t until I felt like,
OK, this is not balanced. This is very off balance. I started to creep professional down.
Being kind of this one thing that always was all the way up.
69

Participants noted various obstacles, professional travel demands to relocation for career
opportunities and the flexibility to manage both personal and professional demands, especially
after having children. Women in the workplace experience a confluence of pulls from their
career ambitions ranging from marriage, children, eldercare, spousal career support, and the
inability to relocate. Oftentimes, men do not contend with the same career pulls as women do,
potentially giving them a career advantage. Three participants shared professional travel was an
obstacle. Cheryl said, “That wasn’t the intent [to have a one-career household], but that was
more forced based on necessity because of traveling because of other things and not being able to
plan around it.” Lauren discussed “b eing on the road. Three to five days a week. I’d missed a lot
doing too much travel” and Lori shared “ traveling a lot and I missed, particularly for my second
child, I missed a lot of their early development.”
The inability to relocate after starting a family or committing to a personal relationship
was another obstacle participants referred to by several participants. They also recognize that the
inability to relocate may limit their career potential. Julie said,
I was willing to relocate when I was alone, but then when I met someone, I wonder. If I
were a man, would I have just told that person I just met that this is what I’m doing
because this is best for my career, and he would have followed me?
Lori stated, “ For a long period, I was less mobile and in at a certain point in my career that
became a detriment.”
Two participants also shared that relocation away from family and friends to further their
careers was a major personal sacrifice. They also recognize that the inability to relocate may
limit their career potential. Elizabeth said, “ There were choices that I made to stay closer to
family. That probably limited my career because I mean whether or not you want to relocate if
70

you follow maybe a passion or desire to leave the country.” Julie recalled, “ I was single and free
but still moving to across the country. I mean, that’s a major personal sacrifice.”
Cheryl shared the need to go to a one-career household to manage the demands of their
personal and professional life. Cheryl transitioned to a one-career household when her husband
chose to stay home:
We had to make a trade-off between my career and my husband’s. My husband actually
had to resign, and he stopped his company. So, he actually ended up retiring and closing
his company so that he could help manage the family aspect. We are able to have my
husband retire and stay home, and he’s exceptional at managing our home life, and
managing the house, and managing the things that have to get done, and managing the
things for the kids so that I can focus on this. Most people are not in that spot, right? I
can’t imagine if I needed to, OK, get done from work, get the kids to bed, work until 10,
and then start thinking about laundry or making lunches for the next morning. And that’s
a reality for a lot of people. I’m very fortunate that that’s not my reality.
Lauren was concerned when the senior women role modeled that a one-career household
or having no children were the only ways to achieve a female executive level:
When I looked up to the senior women that were sort of a level or a generation ahead of
me. They all either had their kids when they reached the senior level, had a stay-at-home
spouse, or had no children.
Julie was contemplating which parent was going to choose to stay home after they started
a family: “I go part time in the beginning because I think a lot of parents go into this parenting
situation you’re like, OK, do you both want to work.”
71

The tension between personal and professional demands affected participants career
aspirations and satisfaction. Many times, participants chose professional demands over personal
demands, often at the expense of their own well-being. Over time, managing the juggling act at
the expense of the participants well-being resulted in mental and physical stress which led to
exhaustion and career dissatisfaction.
Summary of Research Question 1
Participants shared how society’s view of female leaders, the lack of a sense of belonging
and the inability to bring one’s whole self to work, gender stereotypes, gender bias in
performance evaluations, the challenges of being a working mother, and the pull of personal
against professional demands impacted their experience as female leaders in S&P 500 companies
in the United States. While participants believe that society views female executive leaders
favorably and is supportive of equality efforts, they highlighted challenges such as the inability
to execute a strategy that enables the equal representation of female leaders, the challenge of
being a token female, and, at times, the disingenuous intent of some who promote females into
leadership positions simply to “ check the box.” Participants also highlighted the importance of
belonging on their self-esteem, job performance, career satisfaction, and ambition. Most
participants said they left companies because they did not feel like they belonged and felt
isolated and lonely. Participants that felt a strong sense of belonging had long tenures at their
company and reported more career satisfaction. When participants lacked belonging, they often
showed up as a “different person” professionally versus pe rsonally, which was exhausting and
demotivating. The inability to show up as one’s “whole self” can lead to feelings of isolation,
negative job attitudes, and higher attrition rates.
72

Additionally, participants shared situations where women were either expected to or did
conform to traditional male leadership styles. When they did, they received backlash for
displaying leadership traits or behaviors not expected of female leaders. This backlash can
happen in the form of being disliked, discriminated against, or perceived differently than women
in general. The backlash that participants shared is a form of gender bias. Gender bias has a
negative impact on performance evaluations and calibrations and is attributed to one of the
reasons why many female leaders ascend to executive-level roles at a slower rate than male
leaders. Participants believed they were expected to do more to prove themselves than their male
counterparts and that senior leadership was more apt to lean into male leaders versus female
leaders. The burden of proving themselves more than their male counterparts also showed up in
risk aversion, which drove some participants to “play it safe” and not take risks in their careers
out of fear of getting penalized for mistakes. When participants felt unsupported, unfairly
evaluated, or received negative feedback, their self-efficacy started waning, and so did their
career ambitions.
Participants described starting a family in the United States as a career obstacle that
impacted how and when they planned their pregnancy, where they worked, which spouse
worked, and if they were willing to relocate. These factors contributed to their career ambitions
and satisfaction. Every participant believes the United States does not offer strong family leave
support. As a result, they sought out companies that could fill the gap. Several participants
experienced being disadvantaged due to having children and a career and shared stories of
answering work calls from the maternity ward to ensure they were not viewed as “ out of the
game” or hiding their children’s pictures so that their career commitment was not questioned.
One way around these obstacles was to have their children later in life after they attain a certain
73

professional level. This gave them the resources to manage their familial leave and some
protection against the potential bias faced by working mothers in the United States. Participants,
with children or without, shared that the tension between personal and professional demands
affected their career aspirations and satisfaction. Females still tend to take on more of the
domestic duties which makes this even more challenging. Many times, participants chose
professional over personal demands, often at the expense of their own well-being.
Research Findings Pertaining to Research Question 2
Three findings emerged to address Research Question 2: What factors do female leaders
in S&P 500 companies in the United States say influenced their career aspirations over time?
One finding related to why some participants’ career aspirations waned over time: personal
sacrifice, burnout and opting out. Two findings related to why some female leaders remained
committed to their careers were (a) strong female role models and (b) company support.
Personal Sacrifice, Burnout and Opting Out
Participants shared that the personal sacrifices they made in service of their professions
contributed to their career aspirations waning over time. When asked in Research Question 1 to
describe their experience as female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States, the
participants shared a society that views female leaders positively but has challenges supporting
equal representation, a lack of belongingness in the workplace, the persistence of gender
stereotypes and bias, the challenges of being a working mother and the pull of personal demands
against professional ones. Over time the personal sacrifices coupled with the need to overcome
these obstacles eroded career ambitions, driving three participants to ultimately opt out of their
careers and three participants to reduce their career ambitions.
74

Each participant shared sacrificing time away from their children, family, and friends due
to job demands, relocation or travel, being stripped of their personal support system, or having to
maintain a long-distance relationship due to relocation. Cheryl stated, “ I’ve been asked to do
three jobs, and I lost out on a year of my kid’s life because I was doing three jobs and because I
was working 70 to 80 hours a week.” Joy said,
I think the sacrifice of missing things in personal life is something that seems hard and
sad to me, and this was even before I had a kid. Even things like going on vacation and
truly disconnecting when I would see, I mean, my CMO at Company D would text me on
vacation needing stuff.
Daniella said, “ My support system was stripped away between family and friends.” Diane
added, “An other sacrifice was for early relationships. It made me do long distance for almost 5
years and doing a year-long distance between Seattle and Chicago. We finally called it quits
because our careers couldn’t bring each other together.”
The personal sacrifices in service of their career aspirations often resulted in neglecting
themselves, which took a physical and or mental toll over time. Half of the participants
mentioned that they did not realize they were not taking care of themselves until their mental and
physical well-being was negatively impacted. When asked about personal sacrifice Diane shared
that her “ physical health was impacted twice, once led to disability and the other to burnout.”
Ann added, “ You’re not being honest with yourself. You’ve been neglecting yourself.” Elizabeth
stated, “ To dedicate your responsibility to those family needs and many times you do those
things, really at a great sacrifice to your own personal needs.” Lastly, Cheryl mentioned,
“There’s a lot of extra stress on me and health and physical terror on my body and just also the
mental aspect of it. But I made a choice going into it, where I knew it.”
75

Maria mentioned that despite physically shutting off from work, she had difficulty
mentally shutting off from work and being present at home or taking the mental break that is
important for personal well-being.
I can shut off physically where I’m off my computer. I’m shut down. I’m not working,
I’m not on my phone working. But mentally, I’m not shut off, and emotionally I’m not
shut off from work, and I’ll carry that. Whether it be stress, whether that be anxiety,
whether it be worry, I can sometimes carry that into my personal life, and it can bleed
into our home, and it’s difficult to be present.
Three of the five participants with fewer than 15 years of work experience noted that
their career aspirations waned over time as a result of seeing female executive leaders sacrificing
too much personally in service of their careers. Joy said,
When I was graduating from college, and you asked me what my ambition was, I would
say I want to be CMO of a big Fortune 500 company. That’s the dream. And each year, I
find myself getting further and further away from that ambition because of the female
leaders I see in those roles and the sacrifices I see them make or assume because I’m not
them or assume they make given an email I get at 2:00 AM on Saturday. Given a
personal reaction or something and sensing stress or fatigue or things like that given a
response to a question about their family, and they can’t really speak to it.
Elizabeth added, “ Your responsibility to those family needs and many times you do those things,
things really at a great sacrifice to your own personal needs.”
Julie said that they have similar career ambitions, but their reasons for their career
ambitions have changed “Well, reality is if you want to have a family and you want to have some
sort of companionship, it is a conversation beyond just you in your head to figure out what you
76

want. So, I think now I also have a greater reason, I want to set a good example for my future
children.”
Participants described how their personal sacrifices and mental and physical stress
manifested in their personal and professional lives, often resulting in burnout. Professional
burnout contributes to lower career ambition, less job satisfaction, and turnover. Daniella said,
Everything else around me was off. I was personal, in an awful state, and that really
impacted towards the end what I was capable of doing as an employee because I was so
personally just off. I wasn’t myself, I knew, that’s when I knew I needed a change
because I said I’m not even giving you what I know I’m capable of giving you because
I’m not my whole self-right now because everything else has gone personally.
Over time, the participants realized that the pace with which they were working, the
stress that they were managing, the obstacles they were trying to overcome, and the extra effort
they were committing to achieve their career aspirations were not sustainable. Ann mentioned,
This constant “look at how supportive they are” means I have to be 200% more amazing
at work every day, and I think, ultimately, you come to realize this isn’t normal.
I don’t know if I can literally make it another day, but you feel this constant torment of
trying to be amazing everywhere. I think, for me, the barriers and that heaviness was all
inside that was manifesting.
Lori stated, “ It was also just like you get to a point of burnout, and you’re like, OK, this clearly
isn’t working. There is no way this is sustainable.” Lauren said,
I think I tried to ignore it for all the years while I was sort of doing the Wall Street thing,
and, ultimately, it caught up with me. It strained my marriage, my relationship with my
kids, and we made it work, but things were kind of falling apart.
77

The burnout led participants to re-assess their career aspirations. Ann mentioned,
Then, you have this 20 months of let me re-evaluate my life kind of mode, and am I
really happy? Is this really giving me energy? I know I’m giving energy and I’m making
a difference in making an impact, but what am I getting back in return
Cheryl said,
If I won the lottery tomorrow, I would retire because of the values and the things that are
important to me or my family in my life, and there’s enough stuff in corporate America
that doesn’t provide value. So, that would be what I would do.
Diane shared that the fatigue ultimately drove her to leave her organization for another
one: “I was working 60 hours on average for weeks, it caused burnout, and when it started to
impact my health, that is when I looked to go to another company.”
Five participants felt like they had no other option but to opt out or had the desire to opt
out but not the ability to do it. Lauren said,
Yeah, I felt like the only option I had at that point was to step away, and I also felt like
when I was at home, I was spending too much time at work, and when I was at work,
they were viewing me as not being all in, and I was doing nothing. Well, it felt like I was
doing nothing well. I’m not giving enough to either place.
Cheryl said, “ Now if we go to where I am right now. If my husband and my careers were
switched, I would have opted out, and if we were following his career, I would have been able to
opt out.”
Burnout contributed to the rationale of the five participants who considering opting out
and to the three participants who ultimately decided to opt out of their careers. Lori stated, I
78

definitely did [consider opting out]. I think before I left to the previous company that I was at for
20 years, I was definitely on the ropes, and I was just ready to be done.”
Three of the five participants with 15 years of greater work experience did opt out of their
careers after achieving executive-level status. Elizabeth said,
It seemed to evolve further and further away from me and away from what it was, which
inspired me to be there in the first place. So, when it was time for me to make that
decision, it wasn’t hard because in my heart I had already left.
Ann mentioned,
I did choose to opt out, and it was probably one of the hardest decisions I ever made. I
never thought I would opt out, never in my whole entire life, ever said, you know what
I’m gonna leave, especially when I knew a bigger role was imminent for me, and so it
was hard.
Lauren stated,
I did [opt out]. When that kind of confluence of my mom getting sick, me starting to have
health issues, realizing that the kids were getting older. I’d missed a lot doing too much
travel, straining my marriage. I felt like I was stagnating at work because of all that and
that the sacrifices I was making just weren’t worth it anymore, and I thought there has to
be something better, so I stepped away.
The female executive leaders who did opt out mentioned feeling like the work was no
longer purposeful. Elizabeth said,
I think that was really literally a turning point for me, so when I look back, I think for me,
I measure my success by the lives that I touched, the careers that I know that I
contributed to the young people I poured into.
79

Lauren added,
I started experiencing health problems because essentially of hitting burnout, and I let it,
and I didn’t feel like there was any other option for me up until that point, and then It was
too late to fix it. It, like, just all fell apart.
The participants who faced similar obstacles over time but did not opt out said that strong
female role models, sponsors, and company support played an important role in their decision to
remain committed to their careers.
Over time, the personal sacrifices, coupled with the mental and physical stress of
navigating the career obstacles shared in Research Question 1, contributed to a reduction in
career aspirations and, for some, the choice to opt out of their careers. The participants,
especially the ones with greater than 15 years of work experience, endured personal sacrifices
and the stress of navigating the careers obstacles shared in research question one for a longer
period of time which contributed to burn out and career dissatisfaction.
Strong Role Models
Role models played a critical role in female executive leaders’ success. Having female
role models in an organization can provide examples for women to aspire to certain levels,
increase the availability of mentors for other women, and create a sense of belonging.
When participants had role models who were similar to them, they had more confidence
in their ability to achieve higher levels within the organization. They tended to prosper in their
careers and had higher levels of belonging and career satisfaction. Role models helped them see
what was possible. Cheryl said,
If I hadn’t had that experience, [seeing role models that looked like me] I don’t know that
I would have ever seen that this is possible for me. I never would have thought of it
80

because she saw something in me that I didn’t see in myself. Then, she pulled me up to
the national board, but she gave me these opportunities that I never would have even
thought of, or that I never would have seen myself doing.
The role models helped Joy feel cared about and valued and gave her a sense of
belonging:
Company D has people that I looked at as role models. There were people whom I felt
genuinely cared about me as an employee developing me, but also as a person. Fierce and
amazing, and we were really, really fortunate that we were surrounded by really strong
women, and you don’t know what you have until it’s gone.
When participants faced career challenges or pivotal career moves, they drew on the
support and learning from their role models to persevere through difficulties. Elizabeth
mentioned,
Drawing from those experiences I had from the role models that I’ve had over the years.
Sometimes faking it, but sometimes not. I’d lack the confidence I lacked the real true
belief that I belonged that I really had a right to be considered for bigger jobs, and
honestly, that didn’t change until I came to New York and so when I came to New York
and saw all of these women.
Diane recognized the impact their role models had by paving the way for more female
leaders to obtain and remain in executive levels roles and provided access to other important
leaders as a means to increase their professional network. She said,
I haven’t encountered a lot where my gender has been the thing to stop me, and I think a
lot of it has to do with the people who came before me have paved that way.
81

If it wasn’t for her [my role model] because she also gave me access to listen to all these
other leaders and to hear their stories and to know I can tap into them, they are now my
friends, and so those are the role models.
Strong role models helped participants navigate the career obstacles shared in research
question one. They set the example of the kind of leader one can become which is critical for
underrepresented employees. Participants said strong role models helped them see what was
possible for them, cared for, supported them, and encouraged them to take on new career
opportunities. Strong role models contributed to the participants career satisfaction and
progression, created a sense of belonging and improved their engagement and retention.
Company Support
Participants shared the support they received from their companies, leaders, coaches, and
mentors, had a positive impact on their ability to achieve their goals and career satisfaction. Ann
stated,
I feel like the companies, whether it was Company E or Company F, have always been
really supportive. They’ve been very supportive of whatever I had to do. I recognize,
though not a lot of other employees or women have that kind of support.
Julie mentioned,
People are so very personable, so I felt a sense of belonging, and I’ve also felt that for the
most part, I’ve been recognized, and my talents and my focus and everything I’ve done
has been appreciated. That helps, too. I do feel a sense of belonging and family.
Three participants mentioned financial support and familial leave support during
important life stages that had a positive impact on their career aspirations, career satisfaction, and
retention. Lori said,
82

I was fortunate enough to work for a company that supported that and helped me pay for
[IVF], so all of those things I’m very thankful for and would not have had without that
experience. So, all of those things were really positive, and also that the company paid for
me ultimately to have the fertility treatment that I needed in order to have my children.
Joy discussed an advocate: “Turns out he’s the one who had my boss called me back and get me
maternity leave because he’s such an advocate of women.”
When participants felt support by their companies they were highly engaged and
committed. Company support ranged from the availability of mentors or male allies to creating
an inclusive environment that led to a greater sense of belonging to familial leave support during
important life stages.
Summary of Research Questions 2
Participants shared how personal sacrifices, often at the expense of their own well-being,
led to burnout or exhaustion, which drove several participants to reassess their career ambitions
or opt out of their careers entirely. Participants made personal sacrifices in service of their career
ambitions. These personal sacrifices were driven by many of the obstacles mentioned in the
findings from Research Question 1, a society that views female leaders positively but has
challenges supporting equal representation, a lack of belongingness in the workplace, the
persistence of gender stereotypes and bias, the challenges of being a working mother and the pull
of personal demands against professional ones.
At times, these personal sacrifices led to physical and mental stress due to de-prioritizing
their personal well-being. Personal sacrifice included time away from family and friends, the
mental stress or pressure of job responsibilities, and a need to relocate away from loved ones.
83

Over time, the exhaustion and stress led to burnout, which led many participants to reassess their
career aspirations.
Professional burnout contributes to lower career ambitions, less job satisfaction, and
higher turnover. After much consideration, three participants with greater than 15 years of
experience opted out of their careers. Four participants with fewer than 15 years of experience
said they either considered reducing their career aspirations or did reduce them by not seeking
promotions they previously wanted, not relocating for jobs that were essential to prior career
goals or relocating closer to family despite the impact on their career or current position.
Two ways to counter female leaders opting out and reduced career aspirations is to ensure
the presence of strong role models and to increase company support. Participants said strong role
models improved their career progression, created a sense of belonging and increased retention.
When participants believed companies supported them they took more risks, were highly
engaged and were more committed to their long term career aspirations.

84

Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion
Females are entering the United States workforce at rates equal to men with similar
career aspirations but they continue to be underrepresented in leadership positions in S&P 500
companies. As of January 2022, only 31 females (6.2%) held CEO positions of S&P 500
companies in the United States (Catalyst, 2022). Their under-representation persists despite data
showing that companies deliver stronger financial performance when they have more female
leaders. Enterprises with one or more female directors outperform enterprises with no female
directors by a mean of .57% in return on assets and 3.26% in return on equity (Egerová &
Noskova, 2019). This qualitative study explored the experiences of female leaders in the United
States to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how they explain their
underrepresentation in executive-level positions.
This chapter includes a discussion of major findings related to how participants described
their experience as female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States and why some
reported that their career aspirations waned over time, driving some to opt out of their careers.
Also included is the analysis of the findings in context of the Bronfenbrenner Framework and
five recommendations to address the career obstacles participants described with the intent of
increasing career aspirations and retaining female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United
States. The chapter concludes with limitations and delimitations, recommendations for future
research, and a summary.
Discussion of Findings
This study focused on the underrepresentation of female leaders in S&P 500 companies
in the United States, which has been associated with negative corporate financial performance.
Using qualitative methods, I interviewed 10 female leaders to gain a more comprehensive
85

understanding of how they explained their under-representation in executive-level positions. In
total, nine findings emerged from the interview data: six findings related to Research Question 1
and three findings related to Research Question 2.
I used Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theoretical framework, which focuses
on the evolving interaction between the environment and the developing person, to analyze the
findings. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological framework is one of the most accepted explan ations
regarding the influence of social environments on human development. The model focuses on
the evolving interaction between the environment and the developing person, who is at the
innermost level (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). I used the advocacy-based theory of change, which
assumes that a deeper understanding of the participants’ challenges can help address the
obstacles they face throughout their careers, to shape the recommendations.
Research Question 1
Research Question 1 focused on the participants’ experiences obtaining and retaining
executive-level roles in S&P 500 companies in the United States. Six findings emerged from the
qualitative data: (a) society views female leaders positively but challenges remain, (b) the lack of
a sense of belonging, (c) gender stereotypes, (d) gender bias in performance evaluations, (e)
challenges of being a working mother, and (f) the pull of personal demand against professional
ones.
As noted in Table 2, these findings were analyzed through the lens of Bronfenbrenners
ecological systems framework. Each finding relates to one or more of Bronfenbrenners
ecological systems framework which allows the research to understand the evolving interaction
between the environment and the developing person, who is at the innermost level. For example,
Society’s view of female leaders is influenced by the macroculture, the lack of familial leave is
86

determined by the industry they work influenced by the exosystem, the lack of a sense of
belonging and the inability to bring one’s whole self to work is influenced by the mesosystem
and female role models is influenced by the microsystem.
Society Views Female Leaders Positively but Challenges Remain
Participants believe that society views female leaders positively but struggles to address
the obstacles driving the under-representation. Participants recognize that progress has been
made, and they believe that their companies are committed to improving female executive
leadership representation. In fact, according to research by McKinsey & Company and
LeanIn.Org (2021), progress has been made. Figure 3 shows an increase in women’s
representation across the corporate pipeline from 2016 to 2021, with the largest percent increase
occurring in the C-suite.

87

Figure 3
Representation in the Corporate Pipeline, Percent of Female Employees By Level at the Start of
2021

Participants were encouraged by the progress but acknowledged that stereotypes and
gender bias still existed and had a pessimistic view of them changing over time. Ann shared that
“we’ve always viewed leaders as men that still persist in kind of that unconscious bias world.”
This finding is consistent with the literature that stereotyped beliefs about the attributes of men
and women are pervasive, widely shared, and proved to be very resistant to change. Historically,
leadership was depicted primarily in masculine terms, and many leadership theories have
focused mainly on stereotypical masculine qualities (Miner, 1993). Men are expected to be
agentic by being assertive, independent, rational, and decisive, whereas women are expected to
foster communal characteristics, including showing concern for others, warmth, helpfulness, and
88

nurturance (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Gender stereotypes can be damaging to women in leadership
roles where masculine attributes are considered to be essential. Rudman et al. (2012) shared,
“until women are afforded the same latitude as men to strive for leadership, unequal opportunity
and disparate treatment in the workplace will persist” (p. 177).
Three participants shared the view that some companies and leaders were merely
checking the box by ensuring that at least one female executive leader exists on the team. They
described people viewing female leaders as a medal to be won and as a diamond in the rough.
They question some leaders’ intention as either focused on a quota or a sincere investment in
improving female executive-level leadership representation because they understand its positive
impact on business results.
Participants shared that female executive-leaders in their organizations were often the
only ones on the executive team and became viewed as the token female. A token female is one
who is a part of a minority group, usually representing less than 15% of an organization’s
employees. Schrobsdorff (2017) suggested that “when you are less than 15% of a dominant
majority group, it’s harder to voice your own ideas. There’s tremendous pressure to assimilate
for your own survival rather than risking your place in the group by challenging the majority” (p.
38). This is a difficult cycle to break because until there is a pipeline of female leaders, there will
not be an increase in executive-level female representation above 15%, which is needed to
achieve the tipping point and start to break the cycle.
Participants shared stories of watching female executive leaders in their company
emulate men, from how they dressed to how they styled their hair and how they spoke and
behaved. Highly visible executive-level women may be subject to greater performance pressure
and more likely to behave stereotypically (Kanter, 1977). Being the only female contributes to a
89

lack of psychological safety and the inability to bring one’s whole self to work. The tipping point
theory suggests that when there are less than 15% of women on a team, they may feel
scrutinized, which can constrain their ability to be individuals with their own ideas
(Schrobsdorff, 2017). Participants spoke about the combination of having too few executive-
level female role models with the fact that the few they did have did not represent who they
wanted to be. This led many participants’ career ambitions to wane.
The Lack of a Sense of Belonging
All participants expressed a lack of belongingness at some point in their careers
regardless of their years of experience, position, career satisfaction, or industry. The majority of
participants felt a lack of belongingness with both their direct team and when they looked up to
the most senior leaders of their organization. Others felt a strong sense of belonging on their
direct team but not with the senior leaders of their organizations. The two participants who felt a
strong sense of belongingness across both their direct team and the senior leaders had longer
tenure and higher career satisfaction than the other participants.
Participants who felt a strong sense of belongingness had lower turnover and higher
career satisfaction, self-efficacy, job performance, and career ambition. This finding is consistent
with the literature on belonging. When females are underrepresented in a group setting, they tend
to experience a low sense of belonging and low performance (Elliot et al., 2018). A positive
sense of belonging, especially early in a setting, helps individuals build substantive relationships
and provide lasting benefits (Elliot et al., 2018). Lack of access to social bonding presented an
obstacle to advancement for women in organizations and manifested in the underrepresentation
of women in executive positions (Schulz & Enslin, 2014). Female leaders’ underrepresentation
90

in an organization can manifest into a lower sense of belonging and access to social bonding,
which can negatively impact performance and career advancements.
Participants intentionally showed up at work differently from the person they were
outside of work because they lacked belonging and psychological safety and feared backlash by
not conforming to the dominant male culture in their workplace. In many cases, participants
shared that female executive leaders behaved like men in an attempt to fit the stereotypical male
leadership style their company’s leaders expected. Participants with greater than 15 years of
work experience witnessed female executive leaders conforming to male stereotypes by either
not having children, having a spouse that stayed at home with the children, or having children
much later in life once they achieved an executive-level leadership role. They had few, if any,
examples of female leaders who brought their whole selves to work, so they felt uncomfortable
doing so.
The research suggests that not being able to be one’s whole self at work can create a
sense of not belonging, leading to feelings of isolation, a contributor to female executives’
increased attrition rates in the United States (The Network of Executive Women, 2018). This
study’s results coincide with the literature regarding the burden of not bringing one’s whole self
to work. Women who switch back and forth between professional and personal identities have
negative job attitudes (von Hippel et al., 2011a) and a reduced likelihood of recommending other
women to the field (von Hippel et al., 2015). Participants said it was exhausting, stressful, and
isolating to maintain two different personas. According to Schrobsdorff (2017), research has
shown that at least 30% of a group must consist of nonconformists before the other label is
abandoned and each member is valued for him or herself.

91

Gender Stereotypes
The concept of think leader, think male is the idea that leadership has been historically
depicted primarily in masculine terms and that most leadership theories focus on stereotypical
male traits (Miner, 1993). Participants said they were often described as having male qualities
versus strong leadership skills. Cultural stereotypes have created an expectation of how males
and females should behave. Prescribed traits consist of rules of how male and female leaders are
supposed to behave, and proscribed traits are negative qualities that are prohibited for only one
gender (Rudman et al., 2012). For example, strong male traits (e.g., assertive) are proscribed for
females but tolerated for males, while weaker female traits (e.g., meekness) are proscribed for
males but tolerated for females (Prentice & Carranza, 2002).
Participants shared the backlash they received when they were viewed as too aggressive
or candid because they had a different point of view than executive leaders or suggested
alternative solutions. They perceived this feedback when their male counterparts were rewarded
for similar behavior. Lori shared a story of being passed up for an interview because of her
aggressive behavior when months later, the male colleague received recognition for “telling it
like it is.” The expectations inherent in the female gender role mean females should be
communal, yet expectations inherent in most leader roles require being agentic. The tension
between the communal qualities that people prefer in women and the predominantly agentic
qualities they expect in leaders creates cross-pressure (Eagly, 2007). Catalyst (2007, 2018)
referred to this tension as the double-bind dilemma whereby perceptions of gender stereotypes
are manifested, creating the tendency for women to be seen as competent or likable but rarely
both. These gender stereotypes were obstacles all participants experienced, driving
dissatisfaction and frustration with their careers.
92

Gender Bias in Performance Evaluations
Participants shared examples of being passed over for promotions or receiving
evaluations that were lower than their male counterparts despite similar business results and
capabilities. This finding is consistent with the literature regarding gender bias in performance
evaluations, which can lead to fewer women receiving promotions. In fact, a study showed that
for every 100 men hired or promoted to manager level, only 72 women were hired or promoted
to manager (Elsesser, 2019). Some researchers claim that this broken rung contributes to men
ending up with 62% of manager jobs while women hold just 38% (Elsesser, 2019).
Participants also shared the feelings of never being enough, always having to bring their
A-game, and constantly having to prove themselves. They believed that women were, at times,
held to a higher expectation of either performance or experiences prior to being considered for a
promotion. This finding is consistent with the research on how in-group bias plays a role in
candidate selection. In-group bias is the tendency for individuals to treat others who belong to
the same social group better than those who do not (Post, 2021). Because of gender bias and its
influence on evaluations, being competent does not ensure that a woman will advance to the
same organizational level as an equivalently performing man. It is proposed by Heilman (2001)
that gender bias in evaluation is a primary cause of why women are so scarce at the top level of
organizations.
Challenges of Being a Working Mother
All participants, even those who did not have children, described the United States as
lacking familial leave support. Participants described choosing to have children after certain
career milestones were achieved so they had more resources so they were not dependent on their
companies familial leave benefits. Some participants also downplayed being a mother or waiting
93

to have children until they achieved certain career milestones out of fear of bias in the
workplace. Prior literature refers to this as the motherhood penalty, which is the disadvantage
mothers may suffer as a result of having children and a career. Finally, they experienced
maternal walls, referring to stereotypes and various forms of discrimination against working
mothers, other caregivers, or mothers seeking employment. Participants shared hiding pictures of
their children in their desks to avoid their leaders assuming they would not prioritize their
careers. According to Luceno (2006), social psychology studies report that female leaders are
usually rated as highly competent, similar to male leaders, until they become working mothers.
Then, they are rated closer to housewives who are viewed on par with the elderly, blind, and
disabled (Luceno, 2006, p. 159).
Regardless of work experience, participants described needing to downplay their
commitment as a mother so their boss would not see them as “out of the game .” The lack of a
strong national familial leave policy, coupled with the fear of the motherhood penalty and
maternal walls, drove several participants to plan children later in life to reach a higher level at
their organizations. Waiting allowed them to have a greater sense of job security and the
financial means to take an extended maternal leave because FMLA in the United States only
covers 12 unpaid weeks of leave. This finding is consistent with the literature because society
still associates women with childrearing. The dissonance between domestic caretaking and a
woman’s desire to work can lead to stress and imbalance between work and personal life,
hindering women from progressing into executive-level leadership positions (Jones & Schneider,
2010).

94

The Pull of Personal Demands Against Professional Ones
Participants cited the pull of personal demands against professional ones as an obstacle
that contributed to their career aspirations waning and a factor that led to some intentionally
stalling their career progression. Females still take on more of the family and domestic
responsibilities in addition to caring for other family members or older parents. These demands
are further exacerbated by the fact that they tend to peak at the same time personally and
professionally, creating significant tension between the two. Participants shared that the need to
travel and relocate away from family for their careers or their spouses’ careers also created
tension between their personal and professional lives. The results of this study are similar to
literature on women facing a strong pull from children, eldercare, spousal career demands, and
family relocation (Jones & Schneider, 2010). Eighty-two percent of accompanying spouses in
relocations were women of mobile dual-career marriages (Jones & Schneider, 2010).
Women’s need for flexibility in the workplace differs by life stages but is more prevalent
during childrearing when women tend to take on more household and family responsibilities.
America’s social and business policies make it difficult for women to balance work and personal
life. Sequencing of family and career has proven challenging regardless of the order. Society
needs to collectively value choices that put family ahead of career to address the need for
flexibility by working parents (Jones, 2012). When an organization recognizes the demands,
conflicts, and challenges between an employees’ work and their personal lives, a working parent,
as an example, can increase their psychological availability for work (Hall & Parker, 1993).
Flexibility can encourage higher levels of engagement in the activities and relationships that
make up a job and, as a result, can produce better work performance (Hall & Parker, 1993).
95

Offering flexible work arrangements can reduce some of the costs, improving executive-level
female retention and increasing productivity.
Research Question 2
Research Questions 2 focused on the factors that female leaders in S&P 500 companies in
the United States say influenced their career aspirations over time. One theme emerged: (7)
personal sacrifice, burnout, and opting out. In addition, two themes related to why some female
leaders remained committed to their careers: (8) strong female role models and (9) company
support.
As noted in Table 2, these findings were analyzed through the lens of Bronfenbrenners
ecological systems framework. Each finding relates to one or more of Bronfenbrenners
ecological systems framework which allows the research to understand the evolving interaction
between the environment and the developing person, who is at the innermost level. For example,
the presence of strong female role models is influenced by the microsystems level and company
support is influenced not only by the ecological systems level but also by the mesosystem and
microsystem levels.
Personal Sacrifice, Burnout and Opting Out
Participants shared stories of the personal sacrifices in service of their careers, often at
the expense of their own mental and physical well-being. They shared stories of working long
hours, coming home to care for their children and tend to their household duties, barely sleeping,
and returning to work early the next day to start all over again. They missed precious time with
their children, spouses, and family. They, often unknowingly, prioritized their profession and
their families over their personal well-being, which eventually took a toll. They did not take the
96

time needed to manage their stress which, for some, eventually impacted their physical and
mental health.
There was a subtheme of constantly trying to prove themselves at work, possibly to avoid
validating a stereotype, taking on additional stress. This effort manifested into unsustainable
hours, anxiety, loneliness, challenges with personal relationships, and physical and mental well-
being issues. The feelings participants shared are consistent with the research on stereotype
threat. Stereotype threat occurs when individuals fear that their social group is devalued by
others (Crocker & Major, 1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Female executive leaders under
stereotype threat may disengage from the potential consequences of their work performance,
resulting in domain disidentification (Casad & Bryant, 2016). Domain disidentification
contributes to reducing career and performance goals (Major & Schmader, 1998). This is
consistent with participants’ career ambitions waning. The personal sacrifices participants
described were often at the expense of their own mental and physical well-being. In some cases,
this led to burnout or being on the verge of burnout which drove several participants to lower
their career ambitions. By definition, burnout is the cessation of operation, usually of a jet or
rocket engine (Merriam-Webster, 2022). For human beings, burnout has increasingly evolved to
be an erosion of a positive psychological state (Schaufeli et al., 2009).
The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), the tool used by most scientific researchers to
measure burnout, is a three-dimensional description of exhaustion, cynicism, and inefficacy
(Maslach and Jackson, 1981). Maslach et al. (1996) posited that burnout is a “state of exhaustion
in which one is cynical about the value of one’s occupation and doubtful of one’s capacity to
perform” (p. 20). The literature is consistent with participants ’ descriptions of burnout, which
included unhappiness, exhaustion, heaviness, and feeling like things were falling apart. One
97

participant said, “ I don’t know if I can like literally make it another day. ” One study compared
the work experience of male and female top-level insurance executives who claimed work was
challenging and stimulating; however, the woman had a higher total workload (paid and unpaid,
vocational, and domestic) and significantly higher norepinephrine or stress hormone (Nelson and
Burke, 2000). Participants shared experiences similar to other women in the United States who
reported higher levels of burnout than prior years and higher than their male counterparts
(McKinsey & Company and LeanIn.Org, 2021).
Three participants reached a point in their careers that personal sacrifice, burnout, or the
burden of overcoming obstacles led them to opt out of their careers. The challenge many female
leaders face is not the impact of navigating one or two obstacles but the cumulative depletion of
energy over time because of the multitude of obstacles they face throughout their careers. It is
like water eroding a rock. The water gradually wares away tiny particles, slowly changing the
physical form of the rock until all that is left is a fragment of its former self.
Three of the five participants with greater than 15 years of work experience opted out of
their executive-level careers, the two others considered it, and the majority of the participants
with fewer than 15 years of work experience reevaluated their professional ambition since
starting their careers. The women who opted out said the sacrifices they made in service of their
career were no longer worth it, and some were so disconnected from their work by the time they
left that their heart was no longer attached to it. They did not find enough purpose in their work
to offset the sacrifice; in turn, they made a rational decision to do something else that drove more
intrinsic value.
The effort required by the female leaders who opted out to overcome the compounding
effect of these obstacles over time offset the value created by their executive careers. The
98

achievement value no longer offset the cost influence, so they opted out. Elliot et al. (2018)
proposed that achievement value is a function of three components: attainment value, the
importance of doing well, intrinsic value, the enjoyment gained by completing the task, and
utility value, how the task fits into an individual’s plans for the future. The cost influence refers
to the impact one activity has on another activity, how much effort it will take to accomplish the
activities, and the emotional cost (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Individuals assess cost based on
effort, meaning whether the perceived effort needed to complete the task is worth it.
Psychological cost is the negative emotional consequences of participating in the task, and social
cost is the potential impact of this task on the individual’s social status (Elliot et al., 2018).
Individuals then weigh the value created from the given task against the detractive factors like
costs to determine the overall subjective valuing of the achievement task.
Strong Role Models
Every woman had a story of someone who helped them along the way. This finding
aligns with research that suggests role models change the representation of a setting, convey
information about the kind of person one could become, make it easier to aspire to something
that others have done before, and offer an opportunity for others to learn from when they display
behavior they wish to emulate (Elliot et al., 2018; Smith, 2002; Smyth, 2020). Lori said, “If I
hadn’t had that experience [with her role model], I don’t know that I would have ever seen that
this is possible for me.” Cheryl shared when referencing one of her sponsors, “I never would
have thought of it because she saw something in me that I didn’t se e in myself.” Joy spoke of
several male allies who were critical to her success: “I had very supportive male allies, I learned
so much from him, he spent so much time with me.”
99

The greater the number of female executive leaders at an organization, the more females
the organization will attract. The more female role models present, the more likely the company
is to attract and retain more female leaders, which is necessary to break the cycle. If a company
lacks a critical mass of female role models, then female leaders may not have a sense of
belonging, which is one of the most important human needs (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). To
break the cycle, companies may need to focus internally to build a pipeline of female leaders
while also focusing externally to attract female executive-level leaders to ensure they have
adequate representation of female role models to create the culture necessary to attract, promote
and retain female leaders.
Company Support
The COVID-19 pandemic and the incidents of racial violence in the United States created
an opportunity for business leaders to advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and belongingness in
the workplace. When companies commit to creating a diverse and inclusive culture and start
taking the necessary steps to invest in initiatives that make a meaningful difference, employees
notice. Participants with higher retention and career satisfaction offered several examples of their
companies investing in them. Some examples are financial support for in-vitro fertilization,
ample familial leave, offering employee resource groups to them feel a sense of belonging, and
strong female executive-level role models.
This supports the research that found a relationship among a positive psychological
diversity climate, higher job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and lower employee
turnover (Madera et al., 2017). A psychological diversity climate is based on how employees
observe their companies diversity policies. Further studies posit diversity-oriented human
resource practices foster higher levels of employee work engagement (Tuan et al., 2019). In fact,
100

diversity-oriented human resource practices have positive outcomes for not only minority groups
but also across all employees (Tuan et al., 2019).
Findings in Context of Bronfenbrenner Framework
The qualitative research findings emerged from analysis through Bronfenbrenner’s
(1979) ecological systems theoretical framework, which focuses on the evolving interaction
between the environment and the developing person, was used to examine the impact of different
environments and obstacles (social, institutional, and individual) on female leaders. The evidence
showed a confluence of events across the four levels of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system
model influenced female leaders’ experience in the Unit ed. It is not one obstacle that is
responsible for the under-representation of female leaders in S&P 500 companies but rather the
culmination of obstacles over time eroding their ambitions and, in some cases, driving them to
opt out of leadership roles. The conceptual model in Figure 2 shows how the events across each
level create obstacles over time that erode female leaders’ aspirations to attain and remain in
executive leadership positions.
These findings are consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) frame work model, such that
the individual is influenced both by events occurring within her setting and events in which she
is not present. Furthermore, the ecological environment to which she is exposed affects her
development along with environments to which she is not directly exposed. The evolving
interconnections between the ecological environments and settings affect female leaders’
development over time, rendering it necessary to understand the findings in the context of the
ecological systems model (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Table 4 organizes the nine findings from this
research into the four levels of the ecological systems model. Examples of a finding in each level
are as follows:
101

• At the macrocultural level, gender stereotypes is the practice of ascribing traits or
behaviors to an individual because of their gender, which is present in society. This is
consistent with the third finding where participants experienced gender stereotypes
for displaying leadership traits or behaviors that were historically associated with
male traits.
• At the exosystem level, lack of access to adequate childcare and maternity leave
support. This is consistent with the fifth finding where participants experience
challenges being a working mother in the United States such as bias in the workplace
and lack of access to adequate familial leave.
• At the mesosystem level, gender bias in performance evaluations results in lower
performance ratings and a slower rate of career progression for female versus male
leaders. This is consistent with the fourth finding.
• At the microsystem level, the lack of female role models can lead to feelings of
isolation and a low sense of belonging. This is consistent with the eight finding that
the presence of strong female role models played a critical role in female leaders’
success.
• At the individual level, the individual is at the center of the interrelated systems that
influence one another (Bronfenbrenner, 1994). The female leader makes personal
sacrifices, often times at the expense of her own well-being, leading to burnout and at
times, the decision to opt out of her career. This is consistent with the nineth finding.
102

Table 4
Summary of Findings in Relation to the Conceptual Framework and Research Questions
Ecological
system level
Subset Obstacles Findings
Research
question
Finding
number
Macro-
cultural
Social Cultural beliefs Society views
female leaders
positively but
challenges remain
1 1

Gender stereotypes 1 3

The challenges of
being a working
mother
1 5

Gender bias in
performance
evaluations
1 4

Gender
stereotypes
Gender stereotypes 1 3

The challenges of
being a working
mother
1 5

Gender bias in
performance
evaluations
1 4

Role
incongruency
theory
Gender stereotypes 1 3

Gender bias in
performance
evaluations
1 4

The double bind Gender stereotypes 1 3

Gender bias in
performance
evaluations
1 4

Gender bias

Glass ceiling Gender stereotypes 1 3

Gender bias in
performance
evaluations
1 4
103

Ecological
system level
Subset Obstacles Findings
Research
question
Finding
number

Personal sacrifice,
burnout and
opting out
2 7

Company support 2 9

Glass cliff Personal sacrifice,
burnout and
opting out
2 7

Company support 2 9

Sticky floors Gender bias in
performance
evaluations
1 4

Broken rungs Gender bias in
performance
evaluations
1 4
Exosystem Institutional Motherhood
penalty
The challenges of
being a working
mother
1 5

Maternity leave
policies
The challenges of
being a working
mother
1 5

Wage
discrimination

Occupational sex
segregation

Gender bias

Maternal walls The challenges of
being a working
mother
1 5

Leaky pipes Gender bias in
performance
evaluations
1 4

Personal sacrifice,
burnout and
opting out
2 7

Company support 2 9
Mesosystem Institutional Lack of
flexibility
Pull of personal
demands against
professional ones
1 6
104

Ecological
system level
Subset Obstacles Findings
Research
question
Finding
number

Company support 2 9

Individual Stereotype threat Lack of a sense of
belonging
1 2

In-group bias
effect
Lack of a sense of
belonging
1 2

Social identity
theory
Lack of a sense of
belonging
1 2
Microsystem Institutional Lack of female
role models
Female role models 2 8
Individual Token female Society views
female leaders
positively but
challenges remain
1 1
Individual Individual Low self-
efficacy
Lack of a sense of
belonging
1 2

Female role models 2 8

Pull of personal
demands
against
professional
ones
Personal sacrifice,
burnout and
opting out
2 7

Pull of personal
demands against
professional ones
1 6

Recommendations for Practice
In 2002, the Harvard Business Review published an article aimed at generating new
workplace policies to address the loss of educated women when they start families and urging
young women to demand better life choices in the United States (Hewlett, 2002). As an
executive-level female leader in the United States, I believe we can have it all, perhaps just not
all at the same time. We are at a pivotal moment in the United States. Companies show a
growing commitment to diversity, inclusion, equity, and belonging. Together, we can address the
105

obstacles that have thwarted female career ambitions and driven many to opt out of executive-
level positions.
I used the advocacy-based theory of change to address the problem of practice. The
advocacy-based theory of change assumes when individuals know better, they will do better
(Klugman, 2011). Therefore, by gaining a deeper understanding of the participants’ challenges ,
we can implement recommendations to address the problem of practice. I used this theory to
shape the recommendations made to S&P 500 companies assuming that as leaders of
organizations learn how to improve their workplaces to address the underrepresentation of
female leaders coupled with the evidence of improved business performance as a result of more
female leaders, they will make the necessary investments and changes.
Five recommendations address the findings that emerged from the research: (a) create a
sense of belonging, (b) design a work environment that supports, promotes, and rewards well-
being, (c) enable flexible work arrangements, (d) implement the universal caregiver model of
familial leave, and (e) implement a fair and equitable performance evaluation process.
Recommendation 1: Create a Sense of Belonging
Maslow (1968) ranked the need for love and belongingness third after the basic needs of
physiological needs and safety needs. Baumeister and Leary (1995) posited that the need to
belong is a fundamental human motivation, and the lack of belonging can lead to a variety of ill
effects on health and well-being. Every participant shared a story about lacking a sense of
belonging as a female leader in the United States. Five participants explicitly referred to the boys
club or fraternity at work, which lacked inclusivity, leading to feelings of loneliness. Being a part
of a group can create a sense of belonging and increase self-esteem. However, when individuals
106

are not a part of a group, they can feel isolated, discriminated against, and prejudged. As
Daniella stated, “My overall sense of belonging is not here, which is ultimately why I left.”
Corporations in the United States spend approximately $8 Billion annually on diversity
and inclusion efforts but miss the mark on workplace belonging (Carr et al., 2019). Given the
importance of having a sense of belonging as shared by the participants in the research, I propose
that belonging be included in the diversity strategy of organization who are interested in
increasing representation of female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States. All four
components play a critical role in improving representation in organizations. Diversity refers to
the representation of differences, equity is about promoting fairness and impartiality, inclusion is
about actions taken to create a trusting culture that values all, and belonging is a feeling of being
connected and forming positive social bonds (Davis, 2020; Westover, 2021). According to a
study conducted by BetterUp of nearly 1,800 full-time workers (Fraser-Thill, 2019), employees
with a higher sense of belonging take 75% fewer sick days, see a 56% increase in job
performance, and a 50% reduction in turnover. As Maria shared, “ That is the reason that I feel
comfortable doing some of the things that can be more difficult, that sometimes other folks may
throw the rag in if they don’t have that sense of “I do belong here” that I feel. And I feel
fortunate to have that.”
Fostering a culture of belongingness takes leadership’s commitment to invest time and
resources. Several tools to help foster a culture of belongingness emerged from the research and
findings. The participants described feeling a sense of belonging when they were connected to a
higher organizational purpose, were part of an employee resource group, believed leaders cared
about them and felt included and accepted among diverse teams.
107

• Ensure employees understand the organization’s purpose, mission, values, and
strategies. By aligning to the purpose and mission, employees will feel a connection
to the organization and experience a sense of belonging (Davis, 2020).
• Utilize employee engagement surveys to get a baseline measure of belongingness to
track progress (Davis, 2020).
• Create connection for employees by giving them the opportunity to come together
over shared interests (Davis, 2020).
• Actively support employee resource groups for underrepresented minorities and
shared interests (Davis, 2020).
• Create an allyship program where leaders can use their power in an organization to
empower minority groups, giving them a voice, support, and resources they need to
be successful (Fraser-Thill, 2019).
• Invest in diversity training to include, but not limited to, unconscious bias, creating an
inclusive culture, how to be an ally, building awareness and empathy as leaders
(Fraser-Thill, 2019; Davis, 2020).
Recommendation 2: Design a Work Environment That Supports, Promotes, and Rewards
Well-Being
According to the Women in the Workplace survey of more than 65,000 employees
conducted by McKinsey & Company and LeanIn.Org (2021), the amount of burnout reported
among women and the gap of burnout amongst women versus men has increased versus prior
years. In 2021, 42% of women reported being often or almost always burnt out compared to 35%
in 2020; men reported being often or almost always burnt out 32% in 2021 versus 28% in 2020.
Burnout is a key contributor to women opting out of the workplace. In this same study, one in
108

three women considered leaving the workforce or downshifting their careers, an increase versus
the prior study. Over time, the participants realized that the pace with which they were working,
the stress that they were managing, the obstacles they were trying to overcome, and the extra
effort they were committing to achieve their career aspirations were not sustainable. Lori stated,
“It was also just like you get to a point of burnout, and you're like, OK, this clearly isn't working.
There is no way this is sustainable.”
There are several recommendations to reducing burnout and increase well-being in the
workplace. Burnout is essentially equivalent to physical, emotional, and mental exhaustion
(Schaufeli et al., 2008). These recommendations were curated from the findings where
participants said they were not prioritizing their well-being, they were not taking enough time off
and when they did they often worked, and they were not prioritizing their physical health or
finding effective ways to manage stress.
• A leadership team philosophy that leads by example setting the tone that personal
well-being is a priority for the organization, such as respecting employees’ vacation
time.
• Implement flexible and remote work access. Research shows that employees with
access to remote work arrangements report a decrease in workplace burnout by 26%
versus employees without access to remote work arrangements (Catalyst, 2021).
• Encourage well-being by offering incentives to employees such as gym memberships,
on-site activities, healthy food options in the cafeteria or break room, and on-site
medical care such as vaccinations or routine health checks such as cholesterol and
blood pressure.
109

• Provide ample paid time off while encouraging vacations not interrupted by meetings,
emails, and check-ins.
• Administer 360 feedback and self-reported techniques to identify individual accounts
of burnout and stress (Rumbles, 2013).
• Normalize empathic listening to share life and work experiences through regular
check-ins with employees (Catalyst, 2021).
Recommendation 3: Enable Flexible Work Arrangements
Women in the workplace experience a confluence of pulls from their career ambitions
including marriage, children, eldercare, spousal career support, and relocation. Often, men do not
contend with the same career pulls as women, potentially giving them a career advantage. Many
of the participants shared stories of the need to constantly prioritize professional demands over
personal ones, often times at the expense of their own well-being. Until the pull of females to
manage both a full-time career and the majority of domestic duties is addressed, it will be
difficult for females to advance into executive-level positions in the United States. The demands
of work and, at times, the lack of flexibility of project deadlines and management’s expectations
create a situation for some female leaders to feel overwhelmed and conflicted. Lauren shared
feedback that her manager expected her to be available at all times, and if she were not, there
would be consequences to her career: “If you're not there to take a call when someone needs you
on a weekend, it’s no problem. We just won’t call.”
Providing flexibility in the workplace is one way to address this obstacle. Flexibility can
encourage higher levels of engagement in the activities and relationships that make up a job and,
as a result, can produce better work performance (Hall & Parker, 1993). Offering flexible work
arrangements can reduce some of the costs, improving executive-level female retention and
110

increasing productivity. The global COVID-19 pandemic created an opportunity to experiment
with workplace flexibility and accelerated the adaptation of technology that enables remote
collaboration. An explosion of literature has been published on workplace flexibility since the
COVID-19 pandemic started. Many organizations are testing a hybrid workplace which creates
flexibility in where and when work takes place (Catalyst, 2021). Catalyst (2021) offers 10
different workplace models on a continuum of all on-site to fully remote (where work happens)
and a continuum of no flextime to full flextime (when work happens). On one end of the
spectrum, an employee has the most flexibility by being fully remote and having full flextime.
On the other end, an employee has the least location flexibility and must be on site with no
flextime. A hybrid workforce decision framework can be assessed through the following criteria
(Gartner, 2020):
• Feasibility: Is it feasible to perform this role successfully from anywhere? Do the
tasks of this role depend on work outcomes or frequent reviews on-site?
• Portability: Is the equipment, technology or infrastructure required to perform this
role successfully portable enough to use anywhere? Does the work require unique
security clearances granted only at the office location?
• Sustainability: How sustainable is it to work remotely is based on the level of
collaboration, connectivity, and creativity required by the role? The higher the
collaboration, connectivity, and creativity that is required, the higher likelihood the
role will need to spend some time in an office location collaborating and connecting
with other team members to accomplish their goals.
Understanding where and when employees will work is one of many steps necessary to
create an effective flexible workplace. Organizations need to also consider training managers to
111

lead effectively in a hybrid work environment, ensure the organization is working with purpose
by making office time intentional, invest in technology to enable remote collaboration, treat
remote and office-based employees equally and stay connected with employees so they feel
valued, supported, and heard. According to a global survey of 7,487 employees conducted by
Catalyst (2021), creating a flexible workplace improves innovation, work engagement,
organizational commitment, inclusion, and retention. The survey also shared that women with
childcare responsibilities with access to remote work were 32% less likely to leave their job
when compared to women with childcare responsibilities who had no access to remote work
(Catalyst, 2021). Creating a flexible workplace helps address the underrepresentation of female
leaders and can encourage higher levels of engagement and produce better work performance for
all employees (Hall & Parker, 1993).
Recommendation 4: Implement the Universal Caregiver Model of Familial Leave
The United States is the only country classified by the World Bank as high-income that
does not have paid maternity leave (Pantekoek, 2020). In 1993, the FMLA required covered
employers to provide employees with job-protected and unpaid leave for qualified medical and
family reasons. It is only 12 weeks, and roughly only 50% of American workers have access to it
(Burtle & Bezruchka, 2016). The evidence suggests that a national paid maternity leave program
in the United States would offer significant benefits for both women and children and improve
the representation of female executive-level leaders. For children, fewer are born with low birth
weight, fewer die in infancy, and more see increased long-term achievement. For mothers, there
are higher breastfeeding rates, a decrease in the odds of hospitalization, and improvement in
mental health. Every participant believed that the United States familial leave is weak and many
of them viewed the lack of strong familial leave policies as a career obstacle. Four of the five
112

participants that had children cited that the lack of a strong maternity leave policy, the additional
responsibilities of being a mother and the bias they faced in the workplace once starting a family
either had a negative impact on their careers or contributed to them to reducing their career
aspirations. Joy described only receiving 4 weeks from the company’s maternity leave policy and
having to negotiate an additional 6 weeks of paid time off, “ They ended up saying they cannot
revise my maternity leave. I was crushed. I ended up turning down the offer because I was that
confident that I was not working for a company that can’t support me. This is so unfair.”
In the absence of a paid national familial leave program, the recommendation is to have
private companies offer the universal caregiver model of familial leave, which encourages
gender equality by offering to all employees well-paid parental leave regardless of gender or
caregiver status (Ciccia & Verloo, 2012)). The universal caregiver model is preferred to other
models, such as the male breadwinner model, which only provides women with limited time off
at low pay, thus encouraging women to take leave while men remain at work (Kaufman & Petts,
2020). Under the universal caregiver model, parental leave is equally available, thus encouraging
both genders to participate in caregiving versus reinforcing the traditional division of labor that
encourages women to do the caregiving while men continue to work. A step towards private
companies offering a universal caregiver model is to have all S&P 500 companies disclose their
familial leave policies so potential candidates can transparently compare familial leave benefits
before deciding to apply for employment.
Recommendation 5: Implement a Fair and Equitable Performance Evaluation Process
One of the hallmarks of American culture is meritocracy: the concept that your progress
is based on merit versus your gender, race, or class (Correll et al., 2020). However, multiple
studies confirm that gender bias negatively impacts female performance evaluations. Foley
113

(1998) suggested that gender influences perceptions of credibility and expertise, which impact
performance evaluations. The study showed that females received lower evaluations than males
despite giving near-identical presentations. An additional study posits that men received
somewhat more-favorable performance evaluations over equivalent women, especially for
leadership roles usually perceived as masculine (Eagly and Carli, 2007). For female leaders, the
lack of fit can result in negative performance expectations, producing biased evaluations,
prejudice, and backlash (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Heilman, 1983, 2001; Rudman et al., 2012).
The literature is consistent with the research finding that the expectation or perceived
expectation that female leaders need to do more to prove themselves, which contributes to why
female leaders take longer to achieve executive-level roles. Ann wondered, “ Why is it taking me
so long to get to where I know I should be? Think about how many more experiences we’ve all
had to have [female leaders] to get that seat.” While Joy witnessed, “Men who have done OK
and have been given an OK review and then women who have been OK and given poor
reviews.” The gender bias can be tied to two concepts: the double-bind and think leader, think
male. The double bind is when women are expected to be communal because of stereotypes
regarding the female gender role and to be agentic because of the expectations inherent in most
leadership roles. When women receive lower performance evaluations than equivalent men, their
prospects of promotion are also reduced.
There are several tools organizations can use to address gender bias in performance
evaluations. In general, educating employees on gender bias, making employee performance
reviews more objective, broadening the group of reviewers, ensuring your evaluation tool has an
effective scale, and performing more frequent evaluations are ways to address gender bias in
performance evaluations. Other strategies are:
114

• limiting or eliminating the open box portion of the evaluation form to increase
objectivity in performance evaluations (Mackenzie et al., 2019).
• creating a rubric for the subjective portion to define the criteria for assessment.
Research shows that agreeing on the criteria for the assessment before making the
evaluation can reduce bias (Correll et al., 2019).
• broadening the reviewer base by seeking feedback from peers and direct reports to
ensure different perspectives are captured (Rivera & Tilcsik, 2019).
• evaluating the current employee performance evaluation tool for gender bias. One
example is to adjust the rating scale from a 10-point scale to a 6-point scale which has
proven to drive less biased results (Rivera & Tilcsik, 2019).
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are restrictions and factors over which the researcher has no or limited
control and that can affect the study’s results. The COVID-19 pandemic was unfolded globally
which limited the ability to interview the participants via Zoom and also negatively impacted the
representation of female leaders in the United States. Additionally, the availability of the
participants were limitation because the research is constrained by time. The interviews took four
months to complete from October 2021 to January 2022. Another limitation was the potential for
the interviewees to have bias and hesitations in their responses that may affect the data. This was
addressed by using pseudonyms for the participants and their companies and by offering the
participant the choice to skip or stop answering questions at any time.
The selection of the interviewees was also a limitation because they were purposefully
selected based on their gender, race, and professional experience, limiting the study to the female
leaders’ perspectives without considering the male leaders’ perspectives. Further, while the
115

participants mirror the current racial demographics of executive-level females, women of color
are underrepresented at the executive level in S&P 500 companies in the United States.
According to Creswell and Creswell (2018), participants are purposefully selected to provide the
researcher with information to further their understanding of the problem of practice and the
research questions. The main point of the interview is to gather specific information (Dexter,
1970). Interviewing is necessary when seeking to understand past events or when we cannot
observe behavior, feelings, or an individual’s interpretation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Delimitations are the boundaries or limits that the researcher sets for their study. The
delimitations were the 10 interviews, the number of interview questions, and the means by which
the interviews were conducted. The design of the study required the narrowing of participants to
female leaders with specific years of work experience at S&P 500 companies in the United
States. I intentionally selected 30% of the participants to be women of color because of the
importance intersectionality plays in the workplace in the S&P 500 companies in the United
States.
Recommendations for Future Research
The current research focused on the experiences of female leaders in S&P 500 companies
in obtaining and retaining executive-level roles and understanding why some female leaders
report that their career aspirations wane over time and some opt out of executive-level positions.
Further research should investigate the impact of the intersections of race, gender, class,
sexuality, and nationality. Crenshaw (1989) introduced the concept of intersectionality through
research that found Black women were disproportionally marginalized due to the intersection of
race and gender. Hill Collins (2000) broadened the concept to include class, sexuality, and
nationality to offer a more robust understanding of intersectionality. Additionally, while
116

conducting this research, the COVID-19 pandemic was unfolding globally. Further research
should be conducted to understand the pandemic’s impact on female leaders in S&P 500
companies in the United States. Finally, a qualitative approach was used to conduct this research.
A quantitative approach could allow access to a larger and more diverse population of
participants across companies and industries.
Conclusion
There is a negative impact on business performance resulting from the lack of female
leaders at the executive level. Enterprises with one or more female directors outperform
enterprises with no female directors by a mean of .57% in return on assets and 3.26% in return
on equity (Egerová & Noskova, 2019). Beyond the business case, having a more diverse
organization with strong diversity climates can lead to more successful recruitment and retention
of talent, increased engagement at work, improved innovation, and enhanced decision making
(Catalyst, 2020).
This research indicated that society’s view of female leaders, the lack of sense of
belonging, gender stereotypes, gender bias in performance evaluations, the challenges of being a
working mother, and the pull of personal demands against professional ones negatively impacted
female leaders experience at S&P 500 companies in the United States. The findings suggest that
it is not one obstacle driving the underrepresentation of female leaders, but the culmination of
obstacles over time eroding their ambitions and, in some cases, driving them to opt out of their
careers. Participants made significant personal sacrifices in service of their careers, often at the
expense of their well-being, which led to burnout or exhaustion, driving several to reassess their
career ambitions or opt out of their careers entirely. Companies that supported female executive
leaders and had role models available to them increased job satisfaction and employee retention.
117

Despite the obstacles, some progress has been made. Women’s representation across the
corporate pipeline has increased from 2016 to 2021, with the largest percent increase at 27%
occurring in the C-suite (McKinsey & Company and LeanIn.Org, 2021). Companies show a
growing commitment to diversity, inclusion, equity, and belonging. Together, we can address the
obstacles that thwarted female career ambitions and drove many to opt out of executive-level
positions. A greater commitment is needed to create a sense of belonging for everyone in the
workplace and to create a work environment that supports, promotes, and rewards well-being,
enables flexible work arrangements, implements the universal caregiver model of familial leave,
and implements a fair and equitable performance evaluation process.

118

References
Adams, S. (2014). Companies do better with women leaders (But women need more confidence
to lead). Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/08/05/companies-do-
better-with-women-leaders-but-women-need-more-confidence-to-lead-study-
says/?sh=187f7df5ffc8
Baker, C. (2014). Stereotyping and women’s roles in leadership positions. Industrial and
Commercial Training. 46(6), 332–337.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
Barron, K. E., & Hulleman, C. S. (2015). Expectancy-value-cost model of motivation. In J. D.
Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of social & behavioral sciences (Vol. 8, pp.
503–509). Oxford.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995, May). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–
529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
Berdahl, J. L. (2007). Harassment based on sex: Protecting social status in the context of gender
hierarchy. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 641–658.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.24351879
Biblarz, T. J., Bengtson, V. L., & Bucur, A. (1996). Social mobility across three generations.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 58(1), 188–200. https://doi.org/10.2307/353387
Bielby, W. T. (2000). Minimizing workplace gender and racial bias. Contemporary Sociology,
29(1), 120–129. https://doi.org/10.2307/2654937
119

Billig, M., & Tajfel, H. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 27–52.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420030103
Blake, K. (2013). Longer maternity leave lowers risk of postpartum depression. University of
Maryland.
Blau, F., Ferber, M., & Winkler, A. (2010). The economics of women, men, and work (6th ed.).
Pearson.
Booth, A. F., Francesconi, M., & Frank, J. (2003). A sticky floors model of promotion, pay and
gender. European Economic Review, 47, 295–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-
2921(01)00197-0
Brainard, S. G., & Carlin, L. (1998). A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in
engineering and science. Journal of Engineering Education, 87(4), 369–375.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.1998.tb00367.x
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecological models of human development. International
Encyclopedia of Education (2nd ed., pp. 1643–1647). Elsevier.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2017). U.S. Department of Labor.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). The employment situation. U.S. Department of Labor,
Burgess, D., & Borgida, E. (1999). Who women are who women should be: Descriptive and
prescriptive gender stereotyping in sex discrimination. Psychology, Public Policy, and
Law, 3, 665–682
Burke, ., & Vinnicombe, S. (2005). Advancing women’s careers. Career Development
International, 10(3), 165–167. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430510732012
120

Burtle, A., & Bezruchka, S. (2016). Population health and paid parental leave: What the united
states can learn from two decades of research. Healthcare, 4(2), 30.
https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare4020030
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested
in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1–49.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00023992
Byrne, E. M. (1993). Women and science: The snark syndrome. The Falmer Press.
Carr, E. W., Reece, A., Kellerman, G., & Robichaux, A., (2019). The Value of Belonging at
Work. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/12/the-value-of-belonging-at-
work.
Casad, B. J., & Bryant, W. J. (2016). Addressing stereotype threat is critical to diversity and
inclusion in organizational psychology. Frontiers in Psychology. Frontiers in
Psychology, 7, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00008
Catalyst. (2007). The double-bind dilemma for women in leadership: Damned if you do, doomed
if you don’t.
Catalyst. (2018). Why diversity and inclusion matter; Financial performance.
Catalyst. (2020). Why diversity and inclusion matter: Financial performance (Appendix).
Catalyst. (2021a). Flip the script: Empathy in the workplace.
Catalyst. (2021b). List: Women CEOs of the S&P 500.
Catalyst. (2021c). Remote-Work Options Can Boost Productivity and Curb Burnout (Report).
Catalyst. (2022). Women CEOs of the S&P 500.
Chemers, M., & Murphy, S. (1995). Leadership and diversity in groups and organizations. In M.
M. Chemers, S. Oscamp, & M. A. Costanzo (Eds.), Claremont symposium on applied
121

social psychology: Diversity in organizations: New perspectives for a changing
workplace (pp. 157–188). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452243405.n7
Ciccia, R., & Verloo M. (2012). Parental leave regulations and the persistence of the male
breadwinner model: Using fuzzy-set ideal type analysis to assess gender equality in an
enlarged Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 22(5), 507–528.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928712456576
Clark, H., & Taplin, D. (2012). Theory of change basics: A primer on theory of change.
ActKnowledge.
Clark Blickenstaff, J. (2005). Women and science careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter?
Gender and Education, 17(4), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250500145072
Coffman, J., & Neuenfeldt, B. (2014). Everyday moments of truth: Frontline managers are key
to women’s career aspirations. Bain & Company.
Cohen, S. (2014). Note: have your cake and eat it too: How paid maternity leave in the united
states could end the choice between career & motherhood. The Daily Mercury.
Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. University of California Press.
Credit Suisse, A. G. (2016). The Credit Suisse Gender 3000: The reward for change report
analyzing the impact of female representation in boardrooms and senior management.
PR Newswire.
Crenshaw, K.W. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist
Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2016). 30 essential skills for the qualitative researcher. Sage.
122

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into
Practice, 39(3), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of
stigma. Psychological Review, 96, 608–630. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.608
Cronin, C., & Roger, A. (1999). Theorizing progress: Women in science, engineering, and
technology in higher education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(6), 637–
661. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199908)36:6<637::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-
9
Davis, L. (2020). How Belonging Differs from Diversity and Inclusion – and Why It Matters.
Indeed.com.
Deaux, K., & Kite, M. (1993). Gender stereotypes. In F. L. Denmark & M. A. Paludi (Eds.),
Psychology of women: A handbook of issues and theories (pp. 107–139). Greenwood
Press/Greenwood Publishing Group.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd
ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Dexter, L. A. (1970). Elite and specialized interviewing. Northwestern University Press.
Dodge, K., Gilroy, F., & Fenzel, L. M. (1995). Requisite management characteristics revisited:
Two decades later. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 253–264.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2004). Women and men as leaders. In J. Antonakis, R. J. Sternberg,
& A. T. Cianciolo (Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 279–301). Sage.
123

Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007, September 1). The labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2007/09/women-and-the-labyrinth-of-leadership.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.
Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573
Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1994). Are people prejudiced against women? Some answers from
research on attitudes, gender stereotypes and judgments of competence. In W. Stroebe &
M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 1–35). Wiley.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski,
& E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 458–476). Sage
Publications Ltd., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n49
Egerová, D., & Noskova, M. (2019). Top management team composition and financial
performance: Examining the role of gender diversity. E & M Ekonomie A Management,
22(2), 129–143. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2019-2-009
Elliot, A. J., Dweck, C. S., & Yeager, D. S. (2018). Handbook of competence and motivation.
Guildford Press.
Elsesser, K. (2019). New LeanIn Study: The broken rung keeping women from management.
Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/10/15/new-leanin-study-the-
broken-rung-keeping-women-from-management/
Enslin, C. (2007). Women in organizations: A phenomenological study of female executives
mentoring junior women in organizations (Publication No. 3259718) [Doctoral
dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
124

Evans, L. A. (2009). Success strategies of high achieving women: A phenomenological
qualitative investigation [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Pepperdine University,
Malibu, CA.
Fang, Y., Francis, B., & Hasan, I. (2018). Differences make a difference: Diversity in social
learning and value creation. Journal of Corporate Finance, 48, 474–491.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.11.015
Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, &
G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 157–188). McGraw-
Hill.
Fiske, S. T., Bersoff, D. N., Borgida, E., Deauz, K., & Heilman, M. E. (1991). Social science
research on trial. Use of sex stereotyping research in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins.
American Psychologist, 46(10), 1049–1060.
Fraser-Thill, R. (2019). Belonging At Work Is Essential – Here Are 4 Ways To Foster It. Forbes.
Froese, M. (2016). Maternity leave in the United States: Facts you need to know. Healthline.
https://www.healthline.com/health/pregnancy/united-states-maternity-leave-facts
Gartner (2020). Remote Work After COVID-19.
Gibbs, G. R. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data. In U. Flick (Ed.), The Sage qualitative research
kit (pp. 90-104). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208574
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). Sexism and other “isms”: Independence, status, and the
ambivalent content of stereotypes. In W. B. Swann, Jr., & J. H. Langlois (Eds.), Sexism
and stereotypes in modern society: The gender science of Janet Taylor Spence (pp. 193–
221). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10277-008
125

Goldin, C., & Katz, L. (2011). The cost of workplace flexibility for high-powered professionals.
The Annals of The American Academy. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716211414398
Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Sage.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384436
Hall, D., & Parker, V. (1993). The role of workplace flexibility in managing diversity.
Organizational Dynamics, 22(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(93)90078-F
Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The Lack of Fit model. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 5, 269–298.
Heilman, M., & Eagly, A. (2008). Gender stereotypes are alive, well and busy producing
workplace discrimination (1st ed.). Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 393–
398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2008.00072.x
Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s
ascent up the organizational ladder. The Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 657–674.
https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00234
Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., Martell, R. F., & Simon, M. (1989). Has anything changed?
Current characterizations of men, women, and managers. The Journal of Applied
Psychology, 74, 935–942. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.6.935
Hill Collins, P. (2000). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of
Empowerment (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203900055
Hoyt, C. L., Simon, S., & Reid, L. (2009). Choosing the best (wo)man for the job: The effects of
mortality salience, sex, and gender stereotypes on leader evaluations. The Leadership
Quarterly, 20(2), 233–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.01.016
126

Hymowitz, C. (2006). Women swell ranks as middle managers But are scarce at Top. Dow Jones
& Company Inc.
Hymowitz, C., & Schelhardt, T. D. (1986). The glass-ceiling: Why women can’t seem to break
the invisible barrier that blocks them from top jobs. The Wall Street Journal, 57, D1, D4-
D5.
Inzlicht, M., McKay, L., & Aronson, J. (2006b). Stigma as ego depletion how being the target of
prejudice affects self-control. Psychological Science, 17, 262–269.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01695.x
Ishizuka, H. (2016). An empirical analysis of women’s promotion in Japanese companies:
Comparison with Chinese and Korean cases. Theoretical Economics Letters, 6(3), 570–
582. https://doi.org/10.4236/tel.2016.63063
Jones, S. (2012). The truth as to “why women still can’t have it all.” American Bar Association.
Jones, T. O., Jr., & Schneider, B. Z. (2010). Beyond “opting out:” Dissecting the barriers
affecting women's entrance and success in business (report). Forum on Public Policy: A
Journal of the Oxford Round Table, 2.
Jou, J., Kozhimannil, K., Abraham, J., Blewett, L., & McGovern, P. (2018). Paid maternity leave
in the united states: Associations with maternal and infant health. Maternal and Child
Health Journal, 22(2), 216225. doi.org/10.1007/s10995-017-2393-x
Kahn, J. R., García-Manglano, J., & Bianchi, S. M. (2014). The motherhood penalty at midlife:
Long-term effects of children on women’s careers. Journal of Marriage and Family,
76(1), 56–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12086
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. Basic Books, New York.
127

Kaufman, G. & Petts, R. (2020): Gendered parental leave policies among Fortune 500
companies, Community, Work & Family, DOI: 10.1080/13668803.2020.1804324
Kent, M. (2010). Women’s economic empowerment… will drive the world’s economy. Vital
Speeches of the Day, 76(12), 558.
Kim, K. Y., Atwater, L., Jolly, P. M., Kim, M., & Baik, K. (2019). The vicious cycle of work
life: Work effort versus career development effort. Group & Organization Management,
45(3), 351–385. https://doi:10.1177/1059601119880377
Klugman, J. (2011). Human Development Report 2011. Sustainability and Equity: A better
future for all. United Nations Development Programme.
Krueger, N., & Dickson, P. R. (1994). How believing in ourselves increases risk taking:
Perceived self-efficacy and opportunity recognition. Decision Sciences, 25(3), 385–400.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1994.tb01849.x
Krueger, N. F., & Dickson, P. R. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy and perceptions of opportunity
and threat. Psychological Reports, 72(3. Pt2), 1235
Kunda, Z., & Spencer, S. (2003). When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they color
judgment? A goal-based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application.
Psychological Bulletin, 129, 522−544.
Liff, S. and Ward, K. (2001), “ ). Distorted views through the glass ceiling Gender, Work, and
Organization, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 9-36.
Lu, & Gursoy, D. (2016). Impact of Job Burnout on Satisfaction and Turnover Intention: Do
Generational Differences Matter? Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research
(Washington, D.C.), 40(2), 210–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348013495696
128

Luceno, C. D. (2006). Maternal wall discrimination: Evidence required for litigation and cost-
effective solutions for a flexible workplace.
Lyness, K. S., & Thompson, D. E. (1997). Above the glass ceiling?: A comparison of matched
samples of female and male executives. Journal of Applied Psychology. The Journal of
Applied Psychology, 82(3), 359–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.3.359
Mackenzie, L. N., Wehner, J., & Correll, S. J., (2019). Why Most Performance Evaluations Are
Biased, and How to Fix Them. Harvard Business Review.
Major, B., & Schmader, T. (1998). Coping with stigma though psychological disengagement. In
J. K. Swim & C. Stangor (Eds.), Prejudice: The target’s perspective (pp. 219–241).
Academic Press.
Maslach, C. and Jackson, S.E. (1981), “The measurement of experienced burnout”, Journal of
Occupational Behavior, Vol. 2, pp. 99-113.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E., and Leiter, M.P. (1996), MBI: The Maslach Burnout Inventory:
Manual, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Van Nostrand.
McAdam, M. (2013). Female entrepreneurship. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203075487
McKinsey & Company and LeanIn.Org (2021). Women in the Workplace.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2021). https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/society
Metz, I. (2005). Advancing the careers of women with children. Career Development
International, 10(3), 228–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430510598346
129

Mieres, D. (2017). Five strategies to mitigate unconscious bias. Northwell Health.
Miner, J. B. (1993). Role motivation theories people and organizations. Psychology Press.
Network of Executive Women. (2018). The female leadership crisis: Why women are leaving
(and what we can do about it).
Padavic, I., & Reskin, D. (2002). Women and men at work (2nd ed.). Pine Forge Press.
Patton, Q. M. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Sage Publications.
Payscale. (2020). The state of the gender pay gap report.
Peterson, J., & Wiens-Tuers, B. (2014). Work Time, Gender, and Inequality: The Conundrums
of Flexibility. Journal of Economic Issues, 48(2), 387–394.
https://doi.org/10.2753/JEI0021-3624480212
Post, S. (2021). The business case for women leaders. The Decision Lab.
Prentice, . A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are
allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(4), 269-–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-
6402.t01-1-00066
Ridgeway, C., & England, P. (2007). Sociological approaches to sex discrimination in
employment: Multidisciplinary perspectives. In F. J. Crosby, M. S. Stockdale, & S. A.
Ropp (Eds.), Sex Discrimination in the Workplace (pp. 189–212). Blackwell.
Rivera, L.A., & Tilcsik A. Scaling Down Inequality: Rating Scales, Gender Bias, and the
Architecture of Evaluation. American Sociological Review. 2019;84(2):248-274.
doi:10.1177/0003122419833601
Rosentiel, T. (2012). Women, work, and motherhood. Pew Research Center.
Roser, M., Ritchie, H., & Ortiz-Ospina, E. (2019). World population growth. Our World in Data.
130

Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of
counter stereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74, 629–645. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.629
Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and
backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female
leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 165–179.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008
Rumbles, S. & Rees, G. (2013). Continuous changes, organizational burnout and the implications
for HRD. Industrial and Commercial Training, 45(4), 236-242.
https://doi.org/10.1108/00197851311323538
Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over-represented
in precarious leadership positions. British Journal of Management, 16(2), 81–90,
https://ssrn.com/abstract=734677
Schaufeli, W. B, Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2009). Burnout: 35 years of research and practice.
Career Development International, 14(3), 204–220.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430910966406
Schein, V. E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to women’s progress in
management. The Journal of Social Issues, 57, 675–688. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-
4537.00235
Schrobsdorff, S. (2017). The tipping point: When do female leaders become the norm? Time,
190(16), 38.
Schulz, . J., & Enslin, C. (2014). The female executive’s perspective on career planning and
advancement in organizations: Experiences with cascading gender bias, the double-bind,
131

and unwritten rules to advancement. SAGE Open, 4(4).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014558040
Schwab, K., Samans, R., Zahidi, S., Leopold, T. A., Ratcheva, V., Hausmann, R., & Tyson, L. D.
(2017). Global gender gap report. World Economic Forum.
Sherbin, L., & ashid, . (2017). iversity doesn’t stick without inclusion. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2017/02/diversity-doesnt-stick-without-inclusion.
Skelly, J. and Johnson, J.B. (2011), “Glass ceilings and great expectations: gender stereotype
impact on female professionals”, Southern Law Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 59 -70.
Smith, D. (2002). The theory heard round the world. Monitor on Psychology, 33, 30–32.
Smyth, L. (2020, April 24). Fixing this one problem will increase the number of women in C-
suite. CEO Magazine. https://www.theceomagazine.com/business/management-
leadership/women-c-suite/
Solomon, J. (1989, April 27). Workplace – Role models, Type E’s, and feminism: Top
executives Compare notes. Wall Street Journal.
Steele, C. (2010). Whistling Vivaldi: And other clues to how stereotypes affect us. W.W. Norton
& Company.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test-performance of
African-Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797
Steinfield, L., & Scott, L. (2018). The global view of gender discrimination in business. A story
of economic exclusion.
132

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S.
Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson-
Hall.
Taneja, S., Pryor, M., & Oyler, J. (2012). Empowering and gender equality: The retention and
promotion of women in the workforce. Journal of Business Diversity, 12(3), 43–53.
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. Falmer.
Tharenou, P. (1999a). Is there a link between family structures and women’s and men’s
managerial career advancement? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 837–863.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199911)20:6<837::AID-JOB978>3.0.CO;2-W
Tuan, L. T., Rowley, C., Thao, V. T. (2019). Addressing Employee Diversity to Foster Their
Engagement. Journal of Business Research, 95, 303-315.
Tyagi, S. (2016, April 28). The benefit of more women in leadership roles [blog post]. Women of
HR. http://womenofhr.com/the-benefit-of-more-women-in-leadership-roles/
von Hippel, C., Issa, M., Ma, R., & Stokes, A. (2011a). Stereotype threat: Antecedents and
consequences for working women. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 151–161.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.749
von Hippel, C., Sekaquaptewa, D., & McFarlane, M. (2015). Stereotype threat among women in
finance: Negative effects on identity, workplace well-being, and recruiting. Psychology of
Women Quarterly, 39, 405–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315574501
von Hippel, C., Wiryakusuma, C., Bowden, J., & Shochet, M. (2011b). Stereotype threat and
female communication styles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1312–
1324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211410439
133

Warren, A. K. (2009). Cascading gender bias, compounding effects: An assessment of talent
management systems (Publication Code D85). Catalyst.
Westover, J. H. (2021). The Importance Of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, And Belonging In the
Workplace. HR.com.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Williams, J., Biernat, M., & Crosby, F. (2004). The Maternal Wall: Research and Policy
Perspectives on Discrimination Against Mothers, 60 J. OF SOC. ISSUES (SPECIAL
ISSUE) 667 passim)
Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990). Sex and psyche: Gender and self-viewed cross culturally.
Cross-cultural research and methodology series (Vol. 13). Sage.
Wirth, L. (2001). Breaking through the glass ceiling. ILO.
Wojcik, J. (2014). Showing women the view from the top: Female executives reinforce gender
diversity as role models. Business Insurance, 48(25), 0018.
Women’s Bureau. (2019) . Women of working age. U.S. Department of Labor.
Wood, G. (2008). Gender stereotypical attitudes. Equal Opportunities International, 27(7), 613–
628. https://doi.org/10.1108/02610150810904319
Vanderbroeck, P. (2010), “The traps that keep women from reaching the top and how to avoid
them”, Journal of Manag ement Development, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 764-70.
Yamagishi, T., Jin, N., & Miller, A. (1998). In‐group Bias and Culture of Collectivism. Asian
Journal of Social Psychology, 1(3), 315–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-839X.00020

134

Appendix A: Interview Protocol
This appendix contains the interview guide used to interview female leaders in the United States.
The table shows the interview questions, the research questions they address, the key concept
addressed utilizing the Bronfenbrenner ecological systems theory 1979 and the question type.
Research Questions:
1. How do female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States describe their
experience?
2. What factors do female leaders in S&P 500 companies in the United States say
influenced their career aspirations over time?

Subject Demographics:
Gender
Race
Years of work experience
Current or Former Organization (S&P 500)

Introduction to the Interview:
Thank you for your time today and for agreeing to participate in this research paper. My name is
Valerie Oswalt, and I am currently a student at the University of California Rossier Program
focused on attaining my EdD in Organizational Change and Leadership. The purpose of my
study is to address the underrepresentation of female executive leaders in S&P 500 companies,
which has been associated with negative corporate performance in the United States. I am
interviewing several female leaders in order to gain an understanding of their career experiences.
As my email stated, the interview should take approximately one hour to complete. I do not
135

anticipate any risks associated with your participation, but you have the right to stop the
interview or withdraw from the research at any time. Your identity will be protected as I will be
using pseudonyms for the participants and their companies. I plan to record our interview as a
means to ensure I have captured everything. Your data along with your identity will be protected.
I would like to request your consent that you understand the purpose of your involvement and
that you agree to the conditions of your participation. Thank you again and let us get started!
Conclusion to the Interview:
Thank you for your participation in this research paper. Your input is valuable, and your support
is appreciated. Do you have any questions for me? If not now, if there are further thoughts post
our interview please feel free to email or call me directly. Thanks and have a wonderful day.

136

Table A1
Interview Protocol
Interview questions Potential probes RQ
Addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type
(Patton)
How do you think society
views female executive
leaders?
Can you please
provide
examples. 2 Macrocultural Belief
Do you believe the
United States offers
strong family leave
support?
1, 2 Macrocultural Experience
Were there any hurdles
or challenges related to
having familial
responsibilities that
may have impacted
your career?
If you have
children, has
having children
caused
challenges and
how have you
navigated
around them?
1, 2 Mesosystem Belief
Describe the expectations
or support you received
from your parents
about your professional
career.
2 Microsystem Feelings
Were there any personal
sacrifices you may
have made in service
of your professional
career?
1, 2 Mesosystem Feelings
Tell me about your
personal home life and
professional work-life
balance.
1, 2 Mesosystem Feelings
Did you experience any
tension between your
professional and
personal life?
If yes, how
have you
managed it? 1 Mesosystem Experience
Describe obstacles, if
any, you may have
encountered because
you are a female 2, 3
Exosystem
and
mesosystem Experience
137

Interview questions Potential probes RQ
Addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type
(Patton)
executive leader that
may have had an
impact on your career.
Tell me about
belongingness in your
professional work life.
1 Individual Feelings
Have you ever felt
stereotyped as a female
executive leader?
1 Individual Feelings
Have you considered
opting out of your
professional career and
if yes, when, and why?
3 Individual Feelings
Did you have a
professional executive
coach and if yes, what
impact did they have
on your career
progression, when did
you get support for
them and what it at
your request?
1 Mesosystem Experience
Describe important role
models in your
professional career?
1 Microsystem Experience
Describe the extent of
your satisfaction with
your current
professional career?
If possible, would
you make any
changes to your
career path? 1 Individual Feelings

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

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

PDF

Hail to the chief: an exploration of female chief executives’ successes

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

Exploring the barriers that contribute to the underrepresentation of Black women in C-suite roles in corporate America

PDF

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

PDF

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

PDF

Navy social and organizational culture and their influence on female officer retention

PDF

Where are they? The underrepresentation of African or Black American senior executives in the Department of Defense

PDF

Improving the representation of female executives in a large utility provider: a modified KMO framework

PDF

Black brilliance in leadership: increasing the number of Black women in the senior executive service

PDF

Europe, we have a problem: the experience of Black female leaders in Europe

PDF

Women in information technology senior leadership: incremental progress and continuing challenges

PDF

Job satisfaction and retention of women clergy

PDF

The field of Los Angeles urban art: gendered stereotyping and opportunities for change

PDF

Sustainable fashion leadership: The female phenomenon

PDF

Communicating to volunteers

PDF

Leveraging the power of data-driven storytelling: C-suite executive leadership approaches to improving business performance

PDF

Examining the journey of Black public education leaders

PDF

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

PDF

Beyond commitments: a qualitative examination of the persistent disparities faced by Black women in executive leadership roles post the 2020 crisis and beyond

Asset Metadata

Creator Oswalt, Valerie Joy (author)

Core Title Where are the female executive leaders?

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 05/05/2022

Defense Date 05/04/2022

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

Tag female executive,gender bias,OAI-PMH Harvest,obstacles,stereotype,underrepresentation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hyde, Corinne (committee chair), Canny, Eric (committee member), Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee member)

Creator Email voswalt@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111259301

Unique identifier UC111259301

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Oswalt, Valerie Joy

Type texts

Source 20220506-usctheses-batch-938 (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. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

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