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.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x