Women have never lacked talent or ambition. What we’ve lacked, and still lack, is a fair shot to lead.
In the U.S., only 37% of leadership positions are held by women despite women comprising 47% of the workforce. And according to research from McKinsey & Company, for every 100 men promoted to manager, only about 93 women, and just 74 women of color, are promoted. The issue isn’t who is capable of leading—it’s how organizations decide who gets to lead.
That gap begins at the very first promotion and compounds over time. When fewer women move into management roles, fewer are positioned for senior leadership later on. As careers progress, the pipeline narrows even further: women hold just 29 percent of C-suite roles, and women of color hold only 7 percent. The result is a leadership ladder where the first rung is uneven—and every step after that becomes harder to climb.
One reason is hiding in plain sight: an outdated model of leadership. Advancement opportunities often go to employees who signal constant availability—those who are always on, always visible, and always responsive. That model assumes unlimited bandwidth and minimal caregiving responsibilities—conditions that disproportionately disadvantage women.
The irony is hard to ignore. Many organizations say they want more women in leadership, yet the expectations that shape who gets promoted were designed decades ago—when leadership roles assumed someone else was managing everything outside of work. Today’s workforce looks very different, yet advancement still favors those who can signal constant availability.
THE ALWAYS-ON LEADERSHIP TRAP
Many leadership roles are still structured around the assumption that the best leaders are the ones who can be constantly available. That expectation may appear neutral, but it disadvantages women because caregiving responsibilities still fall disproportionately on us. According to the National Library of Medicine, two out of three family caregivers are women, making the impact anything but neutral. Until the expectation to be “always on” evolves, the path to the top will remain narrower for women.
The consequences of the “always on” leadership model are already showing up in workforce data. In 2025 alone, nearly half a million women exited the U.S. labor force, according to new national research from Catalyst. Women didn’t leave because of a lack of ambition; they left because the expectations of work collided with the realities of life.
Forty-two percent of women who left the workforce cited caregiving responsibilities, including childcare costs, as the primary factor in their decision, and women who left their jobs were significantly more likely to have worked in organizations without flexible schedules (37 percent compared to 22 percent of those who stayed). The findings underscore a structural reality: when jobs are designed around constant availability, talented professionals—especially women—are forced to make impossible trade-offs.
But the “always on” expectation is only part of the story. Even when women stay in the workforce and continue progressing in their careers, another barrier often emerges long before the C-suite: sponsorship. Advancement in organizations rarely happens through performance alone. It happens when someone with influence advocates for your potential, recommends you for high-visibility assignments, and says your name in rooms you’re not in.
Yet when organizations try to solve the leadership gap, they often focus on the wrong solution: mentorship.
MENTORSHIP ISN’T THE SOLUTION. SPONSORSHIP IS.
Women don’t have a mentorship problem—we have a sponsorship problem.
For years, organizations have proudly pointed to mentorship programs as proof they’re supporting women’s leadership. Nearly 98 percent of Fortune 500 companies offer mentoring programs, and yet women remain underrepresented in senior leadership.
There’s no question that effective mentors can help you grow. But growth and advancement are not the same thing.
Mentors talk with you.
Sponsors talk about you.
That distinction matters because advancement often depends on sponsorship. Research shows that 73 percent of women with sponsors advance faster in their careers—yet fewer than half report ever having had one. Sponsors actively advocate for your promotion. They recommend you for stretch assignments, introduce you to decision-makers, and put your name forward for leadership roles when opportunities arise.
Historically, women have received far more mentorship than sponsorship. Without sponsorship, many talented professionals remain visible within their teams but invisible in the rooms where promotion decisions are made.
Until women have both mentors and sponsors, organizations will keep developing leaders they never actually promote. This is because the signals used to determine who advances often matter more than readiness itself. As long as organizations reward constant availability and visibility, being “always on” will remain the default measure of leadership readiness.
Leadership shouldn’t be a test of endurance. It should be a reflection of impact. The organizations that recognize that difference won’t just promote more women—they will build workplaces where leadership is defined by effectiveness, not exhaustion.
IT’S TIME TO REDESIGN LEADERSHIP
The old model of leadership—defined by constant pressure and endless availability—is already showing signs of strain. Increasingly, professionals across generations are questioning whether those expectations are desirable or sustainable.
The State of Stress and Joy at Work national research study from The Center for Joyful Work finds that stress is shaping the future leadership pipeline, with more than half of American workers reporting they have avoided managing others because of it.
The future of leadership will not be defined by who can tolerate the most stress.
It will be defined by who can build organizations where well-being and promotions can rise together—and where the path to the top reflects leadership ability, not outdated expectations about what it means to lead.
The real question was never whether women are ready to lead.
It’s whether the systems that decide who gets promoted are ready for us.
