How Companies Make Women Less Ambitious Over Time

How Companies Make Women Less Ambitious Over Time

How Companies Make Women Less Ambitious Over Time

First you lean in, then you give up.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

In Sheryl Sandberg’s book Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead, the Facebook executive acknowledged the structural sexism that women face in the workplace but sought to address the “barriers that exist within ourselves.” She argued that women “hold ourselves back” by becoming less professionally aggressive when, for example, they anticipate a pregnancy. Thus the title’s exhortation to “lean in” to the workplace: “We lower our own expectations of what we can achieve…. Compared to our male colleagues, fewer of us aspire to senior positions,” she wrote.

Now the Lean In organization, partnered with the consulting firm McKinsey & Company, has released a new study based on surveys of nearly 30,000 people and 118 businesses. And the findings cut against the idea that women simply don’t try as hard as men to get to the top. They start out equally hungry, but the workplace itself grinds them down.

The study finds that about equal numbers of men and women want to be promoted—around three-quarters of each group. Similarly, about the same share of entry-level employees, women and men, want to reach the highest possible job at their organizations. But men’s desire to get to the top intensifies as their careers pro­gress, while women’s gradually fades away.

Lean In’s findings jibe with other studies. A Bain study of 1,000 people found that more women than men just starting out in their jobs aspired to reach senior management. Over time, however, the level of women’s ambition dropped by 60 percent, while the men’s remain unchanged. It doesn’t take long, either: When first starting out, 43 percent of women aspired to get to the top; two years in, just 16 percent did.

It’s not because women aren’t trying. In a recent global study, equal numbers of men and women asked for a promotion over the last year. Among American MBA grads, roughly equal shares of women and men asked for promotions and raises.

Some might attribute this to ambitious women being derailed by career obstacles of their own choosing: pregnancy and homemaking. But Bain found no evidence that parental or marital status had anything to do with the drop-off. If that’s the case, why do more men come out on top? Women are quick to say that their workplaces are biased against them. More than 40 percent say they have fewer opportunities than men at their jobs, compared to just 12 percent of men who agree that women get left out. And this hunch only gets worse as women progress. Less than a quarter of entry-level women say their gender has inhibited their success, which grows to 31 percent of middle management and 40 percent of senior management.

Women are likely receiving the message that their ambition won’t get them as far as their male colleagues. One study of particularly ambitious and successful employees of both genders found that among those using proactive tactics to get ahead, twice as many men as women actually advanced. Various studies have found that women are not rewarded for pushing to advance or get more pay—they are, in fact, penalized. The words that spring to co-workers’ minds to describe ambitious women include “bossy,” “pushy,” and “abrasive”—not the praise of being “assertive” or a “go-getter” that is lavished on men.

Women aren’t dumb, nor are they blind. This kind of favoritism can be direct or subtle, but it still gets noticed. Some women will see male peers rising quickly around them while they keep treading water and feel even more motivated to work hard and get ahead. But more realistically, many will realize the futility of trying so hard and give in to the way things are.

The advice to lean in, then, only goes so far. Women start by leaning in, but quickly realize that what they’re leaning into is the immovable wall of structural sexism.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x