EXPERT Q&A

Leadership is an identity as much as it is a set of skills. Despite having many of the skills to reach leadership positions, studies have shown women view themselves as leaders less often than men.

In new research, Julia Lee Cunningham and Sue Ashford of the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, delve into the leading factors of what they call the “leader-identity/competence paradox.”

The paradox: Women often score higher than men in leadership effectiveness but less likely to view or label themselves as leaders. Contributing factors to this challenge include lack of supervisor support, absence of role models, work-life conflicts and gender biases.

However, research by Cunningham and Ashford points to a more cognitive factor: women’s discomfort in adopting the leader label. Those with a fixed mindset perceive leadership capabilities as innate traits, while those with a growth mindset see them as evolving skills.

Cunningham and Ashford discuss insights on promoting inclusive environments. Their joint responses also reflect the thoughts of their co-author, Laura Sonday, who received her Ph.D. from Ross and is a professor at the University of North Carolina.

How do fixed vs. growth mindsets affect women’s ability to see themselves as leaders in the workplace?

As discussed in Ashford’s recent book, “The Power of Flexing,” leadership comes with many challenges. Having a growth mindset in which setbacks are considered learning experiences rather than indictments of skill helps leaders to stay “in the game,” continually trying to be more of a leader and to both face and cope with those challenges.

How do cultural and organizational factors contribute to the gender disparity of the Leader-Identity/Competence Paradox?

In many organizations, women face systemic challenges like limited access to senior mentors/sponsors and disproportionate assignment of nonpromotable tasks—work that benefits the organization but doesn’t necessarily advance their careers. The research shows women volunteer 48% more often than men for these tasks and are 44% more likely to be asked to take them on. Over time, this reduces their opportunities to demonstrate and develop leadership capabilities.

Even when women demonstrate strong leadership competencies, they face what researchers call the “double bind.” If they display traditionally masculine leadership traits, they may be viewed as overly aggressive. If they adopt more collaborative approaches, they risk being seen as lacking assertiveness.

These dynamics do get internalized over time, making it difficult for women to see themselves as a leader—and for others to see them as having leadership potential.

What are the most significant barriers that women face when attempting to change their self-perception regarding leadership?

Gender bias is alive and well in organizations, and women hoping to obtain greater leadership responsibilities suffer from it. When women perceive greater reputational risk in leading, they are less likely to endorse a leader identity. This leads to fewer leadership behaviors, which in turn results in fewer opportunities for external validation of their leadership capabilities.

Addressing this paradox requires examining structural barriers within organizations and the culturally informed self-narratives about leadership.

What are some of the first steps an organization can take to support women in ascending to leadership roles?

Organizations should address the immediate practical barriers and underlying psychological dynamics. A critical first step: Redefine how leadership tasks are distributed—recognizing and redistributing nonpromotable tasks disproportionately falling to women.

Another key step: Implement external validation mechanisms since the research shows women are less likely to self-identify as leaders even when demonstrating strong leadership competence. This validation could involve formal processes for recognizing leadership behaviors, regardless of job title. Also, managers could explicitly acknowledge leadership contributions as they occur.

Organizations should expand their definition of what constitutes leadership. Traditionally “nonpromotable” service-oriented behaviors where women often excel—such as mentoring or building team cohesion—deserve recognition.

By broadening how leadership is defined and valued, organizations could create more inclusive pathways to leadership roles.

Written by JT Godfrey, Ross School of Business