Women in the Workplace 2019

Again this year, women are not leaving their companies at higher rates than men. Moreover, the vast majority of women and men who plan to leave their company intend to stay in the workforce—and less than 2% of employees are planning to leave to focus on family. Women are also asking for promotions and negotiating salaries at the same rates as men, and this has been true since 2015.

Today, 44% of companies have three or more women in their C-suite, up from 29% of companies in 2015. Adding even one woman can make a material difference, given the critical role top executives play in shaping the business and culture of their company. Still, the overall representation of women in the C-suite is far from parity. About 1 in 5 C-suite executives is a woman—and only 1 in 25 C-suite executives is a woman of color.

More women are becoming senior leaders. This is driven by two trends. First, more women are being hired at the director level and above than in past years. Second, senior-level women are being promoted on average at a higher rate than men. Additionally, men at the SVP and C-suite levels are slightly more likely to leave their companies, creating more open positions for women to fill.

Progress at the top is constrained by a broken rung. The biggest obstacle women face on the path to senior leadership is at the first step up to manager. For every 100 men promoted and hired to manager, only 72 women are promoted and hired. This broken rung results in more women getting stuck at the entry level and fewer women becoming managers. Not surprisingly, men end up holding 62% of manager-level positions, while women hold just 38%.

Black women and Latinas are more likely to be held back by the broken rung. For every 100 entry-level men who are promoted to manager, just 68 Latinas and 58 Black women are promoted. Likewise, for every 100 men hired to manager, 57 Latinas and 64 Black women are hired.

62% of men and 54% of women think women are well represented at first-level management.

44% of men and 22% of women think women are well represented in senior leadership.

When asked what the biggest challenges are to getting to equal numbers of women and men in leadership, awareness of the promotion gap at the first step up to manager is low. HR leaders more often point to less access to sponsorship or a lack of qualified women in the pipeline. On the bright side, almost everyone says that women are doing their part: very few HR leaders and employees think women are less willing to do what it takes or are less likely to aspire to positions in management.

The case for fixing the broken rung is powerful. If women are promoted and hired to first-level manager at the same rates as men, we will add one million more women to management in corporate America over the next five years.

For many companies, diversity efforts in hiring and promotions are focused at senior levels, and we’re encouraged by the gains that we’re seeing in senior leadership. Now companies need to apply the same rigor to addressing the broken rung. Fixing it will set off a positive chain reaction across the entire pipeline. As more women become managers, there will be more women to promote and hire at each subsequent level. Put another way, more entry-level women will rise to management, and more women in management will rise to senior leadership.

About a third of companies set targets for the representation of women at first-level manager, compared to 41% for senior levels of management. Companies should use targets more aggressively. Given how important it is to fix the broken rung, companies would be well served by setting and publicizing a bold goal to grow the number of women at the manager level. Moreover, companies should put targets in place for hiring and promotions, the processes that most directly shape employee representation.

Companies are more likely to require diverse candidate slates for promotions at senior levels than at the manager level. But outside research shows that diverse slates can be a powerful driver of change at every level. When two or more women are included on a slate, the likelihood that a woman will get the position rises dramatically.

Unconscious bias can play a large role in determining who is hired, promoted, or left behind. Companies are less likely to provide unconscious bias training for employees who participate in entrylevel performance reviews than senior-level reviews, but mitigating bias at this stage is particularly important. Candidates tend to have shorter track records early in their careers, and evaluators may make unfair, gendered assumptions about their future potential.

There is also compelling evidence that this training works: In companies with smaller gender disparities in representation, half of employees received unconscious bias training in the past year, compared to only a quarter of employees in companies that aren’t making progress closing these gaps.

Companies need to make sure they have the right processes in place to prevent bias from creeping into hiring and reviews. This means establishing clear evaluation criteria before the review process begins. Evaluation tools should also be easy to use and designed to gather objective, measurable input. For example, a rating scale is generally more effective than an open-ended assessment.

Even with the right systems in place, processes can break down in practice. Employees are less likely than HR leaders to say that evaluation criteria are defined before candidate reviews begin, and they report that participating employees do not typically flag bias when they see it. This points to the need for companies to put additional safeguards in place to encourage fair, unbiased evaluations. Without exception, candidates for the same role should be evaluated using the same criteria. Employees should feel empowered to surface bias in the moment and have the training and resources to act when they observe it. In addition, outside research shows that it can help to have a third party in the room when evaluators discuss candidates to highlight potential bias and encourage objectivity.

It is critical that women get the experience they need to be ready for management roles, as well as opportunities to raise their profile so they get tapped for them. The building blocks to make this happen are not new—leadership training, sponsorship, high-profile assignments—but many companies need to provide them with a renewed sense of urgency.

Employees universally value opportunity and fairness. Across demographic groups, when employees feel they have equal opportunity for advancement and think the system is fair, they are happier with their career, plan to stay at their company longer, and are more likely to recommend it as a great place to work.

In fact, we looked at a number of factors that outside research has shown influence employee satisfaction and retention—including leadership accountability and manager support—and together opportunity and fairness stand out as the strongest predictors by far.

Managers have a big impact on how employees view their day-today opportunities. Employees are more likely to think they have equal opportunities for growth and advancement when their manager showcases their work, helps them manage their career, and advocates for new opportunities for them on a regular basis.

Most managers provide this type of career support, and women and men report receiving similar amounts of help from their manager. However, managers don’t do these things with enough consistency: About a third of employees say managers advocate for new opportunities for them a great deal, and less than a quarter of employees say managers regularly help them manage their career.

Companies can help by making sure managers have the tools and training they need to more fully support their team members—and by rewarding them when they do.

Sponsorship can open doors, and more employees need it. Fewer than half of employees at the manager level or higher serve as sponsors, and only 1 in 3 employees says they have a sponsor—and this is equally true for women and men. Moreover, less than a third of employees say they get the sponsorship needed to advance their career. Fortunately, sponsorship is trending in the right direction—just a year ago, a quarter of employees reported having a sponsor.

Companies would be wise to double down on sponsorship. Other research shows that it accelerates career advancement, and employees with sponsors are far more likely to say they have opportunities to grow and advance.

When companies have strong hiring and performance review processes in place, employees are more likely to think the system is fair and the most deserving employees are able to rise to the top. Over the past five years, more companies have adopted best practices, but progress toward full adoption is slow. This year, only 6 of 32313 companies report they do all of the following: set diversity targets, require diverse slates for hiring and promotions, establish clear and consistent evaluation criteria before review processes begin, and require unconscious bias training for employees involved in hiring and performance reviews.

In combination, these are the building blocks needed to foster diversity and minimize bias in decision-making. Given that hiring and promotions are powerful levers in driving pipeline diversity and employee satisfaction, there’s a strong business case for adopting more of these best practices.

There is no one story of women in the workplace. Gender is one of many aspects of women’s identity that shapes their experiences. Women of color, lesbian and bisexual women, and women with disabilities are having distinct—and by and large worse—experiences than women overall17. Most notably, Black women and women with disabilities face more barriers to advancement, get less support from managers, and receive less sponsorship than other groups of women.

Not surprisingly, Black women and women with disabilities are far less likely to feel they have an equal opportunity to grow and advance, and are far less likely to think the best opportunities go to the most deserving employees. They are also less happy at work and more likely to leave their company than other women are.

It’s important for companies to understand that all women are not having the same experience and to directly address the unique challenges that different groups of women face.

Balancing work and life is a juggling act for most employees, and flexibility is key to making it possible. Companies have responded to this need over the past five years. Almost all companies offer employees time off for family or personal reasons, and a vast majority of companies give employees some freedom to set their own schedules or work from home. Employees recognize the benefits of these policies, but they still think companies can go further: Work-life flexibility was the number one issue raised by employees in 2019, followed by the need for more mentorship and sponsorship.

Over the last five years, a majority of employees have become new parents or dealt with a significant personal or family health issue. About half of these employees took leave. Many who did not take leave were able to handle the situation without a break in work, but others point to concerns about work responsibilities, fear that it might negatively impact their career trajectory, or financial concerns. Moreover, more than 1 in 4 employees who took leave say it hurt their career or finances—and this is particularly true for women.

Eighty-one percent of women have a partner who works full-time, compared to 56% of men. And as employees become more senior, this disparity between women and men grows: 72% of senior-level women have a partner who works, compared to only 37% of men at the same level. In other words, men who rise in the workplace are significantly more likely to have a stay-at-home partner than women at the same level. When it comes to household responsibilities, there is also a big gender disparity: 39% of women in dual-career relationships report doing most or all of the housework, compared to just 11% of men in dual-career relationships.

Significantly more U.S. companies offer paid paternity leave compared to three years ago, and the average paid leave available to new fathers has increased from four to seven weeks. Similarly, the number of companies offering extended paternity leave has increased by 59%. New fathers appear to be taking advantage of these expanded policies: In 2019, men were roughly as likely as women to take leave when they became new parents.

Taken as a whole, however, there is still significant room for improvement. About 40% of companies do not offer extended parental leave, and there is very little progress being made on maternity leave. Most notably, the average length of paid maternity leave has remained stuck at 10 weeks—compared to the 20 weeks women, on average, receive in Europe. Since parental leave is critically important to many employees, companies would be well served to provide it more generously.

Companies need to hold leaders and employees accountable for good behavior and have systems in place to surface and address bad behavior. This is worth getting right: When employees think their company is serious about accountability, they are happier and more likely to stay at their company. Yet only 32 percent of women and 50 percent of men believe disrespectful behavior toward women is often quickly addressed by their company.

Managers play a central role in shaping employees’ day-to-day work experiences. When managers regularly challenge gender-biased language or behavior, employees are several times more likely to say their company values people’s differences and quickly addresses disrespectful behavior toward women. But only a third of employees say managers do this often—and women are significantly less likely than men to think this is true.

Compared to employees at other levels, senior leaders are more likely to challenge biased behavior when they see it. About a quarter of entry-level employees say they do this, compared to 53% of senior-level men and 46% of senior-level women.

But senior-level men, in particular, say that they don’t observe a lot of gender bias. Only 12% say they’ve seen biased behavior toward women in the last year. On the other hand, 43% of senior-level women say they have. The challenge is educating senior-level men so they can better spot bias. When senior leaders speak up more often, employees may feel empowered to speak up, too.

Microaggressions are a common occurrence in the workplace. From having their judgment challenged to being overlooked or being mistaken for someone at a more junior level, women are far more likely to experience this everyday discrimination. While 73% of women and 59% of men have experienced at least one type of microaggression, these everyday slights are more common for women. They are almost twice as likely as men to experience four or more types of microaggressions.

Some groups of women face more types of microaggressions. Compared to other races and ethnicities, Black women are the most likely to have their judgment questioned in their area of expertise and be asked to prove their competence. Lesbian women, bisexual women, and women with disabilities are far more likely than other women to hear demeaning remarks about themselves or others like them and to feel like they cannot talk about their personal lives at work.

Although they can seem small in the moment, these negative experiences add up. Over time microaggressions can have a major impact, and it’s important to challenge them when you see them. Women who experience microaggressions are three times more likely to regularly think about leaving their job than women who have not experienced this form of discrimination.

Sexual harassment continues to be a widespread issue at work. Two in five women surveyed have experienced some form of sexual harassment over the course of their career, such as hearing sexist jokes, being touched in an inappropriately sexual way, and receiving unwanted attempts to have an intimate relationship.

For some women, sexual harassment is more common. Lesbian women, bisexual women, women in technical roles, and women in leadership roles are more likely to be sexually harassed. Social science research shows that women who defy conventional expectations of how women should act—for example, because of their sexual orientation or field of work—are targeted more often. Women with disabilities also experience higher rates of sexual harassment, and outside research shows this may be because of their more vulnerable status at work.

Companies need to communicate that all forms of sexual harassment will not be tolerated. Many are doing this effectively. 91% of companies say they’ve communicated their sexual harassment policy to employees in the past year. 80% of employees report that senior leaders at their company have clearly communicated that sexual harassment will not be tolerated. And for the most part, the message is reaching employees: 66% of employees say they could describe their company’s policy to a new employee.

Some companies would also benefit from making the claim process more transparent and putting an audit process in place to ensure that investigations are intensive and outcomes are appropriate. While 59% of employees think a claim of sexual harassment would be fairly investigated and addressed, about 20% are uncertain or think it would be risky or pointless to file a claim. Women, in particular, are less likely to trust the reporting process than men—and women who have experienced any form of sexual harassment are particularly pessimistic.

Some employees also fear a backlash for raising the issue: 38% of women and 24% of men who have been sexually harassed and kept it to themselves say they were worried that reporting could have negative consequences on their career. In addition, companies are wrestling with how to create transparency: Half of employees say that they don’t know if top performers are held accountable for violating their company’s sexual harassment policy.

Given that women are underrepresented across the corporate pipeline, many end up being the only or one of the only women in the room at work. About 1 in 5 women says they are often an “Only,” and this experience is about twice as likely for senior-level women and women in technical roles. By comparison, only 5% of men are often the only or one of the only men in the room, and regardless of their race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation, they face less scrutiny than women Onlys.

Women who are Onlys are having a notably difficult experience at work. They’re far more likely to experience microaggressions than women who work with other women. They are more than twice as likely to be asked to prove their competence, over three times more likely to be mistaken for someone more junior, and about twice as likely to be subjected to demeaning or disrespectful remarks. Moreover, they are twice as likely to have been sexually harassed at some point in their career.

Women Onlys stand out in the spaces they occupy, and this added visibility can make the biases they face more pronounced. As a result, women Onlys tend to be heavily scrutinized and held to particularly high standards. In addition, they are often seen as the standard-bearer for all women. 37% of women Onlys report feeling under pressure to perform and 35% feel on guard or closely watched. Black women, who are often the only woman and the only person of their race in the room, can feel especially on guard and closely watched—50% report feeling this way as an Only.

Companies can’t change the representation of women overnight, but there are strategies they can use to counteract the Only experience. Companies can hire and promote women in cohorts so that there are multiple women at similar levels. In addition, companies should pay close attention to teams or functions where there are Onlys and be deliberate about staffing: rather than staffing one woman on a team, they might put groups of two or three women on teams together. As well as making the Only experience less common, companies can make the experience better by helping women build connections with each other through mentorship programs or by staffing them on cross-functional projects.

Being an Only is common for people of color and gay people. Thirty-eight% of people of color are often the only or one of the only people of their race and ethnicity in the room. Likewise, 68% of gay men and 70% of lesbian women are often Onlys for their sexual orientation.

For people who are Onlys because of their race, the stakes can feel especially high. They are more likely to feel like everyone is watching their every move or as if their actions reflect positively or negatively on other people of the same race. Similar to other Onlys, gay people who are Onlys tend to feel under pressure to perform, closely watched, and left out.

Many companies need to do more to put their commitment into practice and treat gender diversity like the business priority it is. This starts with taking concrete actions like setting diversity targets and sharing diversity metrics— not just at senior levels, but with all employees. It also means holding leaders accountable and rewarding them when they make progress. In most organizations, what gets measured and rewarded is what gets done.

Over time, more companies are putting the right mechanisms in place, and employees are noticing this progress. Compared to last year, employees are twice as likely to say their companies have gender diversity targets in place for hiring. However, there is more to be done. When companies have the right foundation for change—clear goals, obvious accountability, a reward system—they are in a better position to drive systemic change. Gender diversity efforts shift from a nice-to-have to a must-have, and that leads to broad-based action across the organization.

More than half of companies hold senior leaders accountable for progress on gender diversity metrics, up from a little over a third in 2015. And it’s making a difference. Seventy-three percent of senior leaders are highly committed to gender diversity, and close to half say they’re working to improve gender diversity. Senior leaders set the priorities in organizations, so when they’re engaged, it has a positive trickle-down effect: Managers are more likely to support diversity efforts, and employees are more likely to think the workplace is fair.

As a next step, companies should push deeper into their organization and engage managers to play a more active role. Compared to senior leaders, fewer managers say gender diversity is a high priority, and far fewer managers say they are actively working to improve diversity and inclusion.