The double bind that holds women back @work

Women should not have to walk a tightrope between competence and likeability while men lead freely on their own terms, writes Mette Johansson

Women in the workplace often find themselves in a no-win situation, navigating a narrow corridor of acceptable behaviour that stifles their leadership potential. This phenomenon, known as the “double bind” sees women perceived as either too soft and weak or too assertive and difficult. This conditioning begins in childhood and persists throughout their careers, shaping societal expectations that hinder their ability to achieve their full potential.

Social conditioning starts early

From a young age, girls are encouraged to be polite, accommodating, and nurturing. When both a girl and a boy misbehave, it is often the girl who is first admonished with, “Be good”. This early socialisation makes it challenging for women to assert themselves in leadership roles without being labelled as bossy or aggressive. This ingrained bias follows women throughout their careers. In leadership positions, women are expected to soften their messages, while men are rewarded for being direct. Additionally, women often take on “office housework” — tasks such as note-taking and event planning — which, while necessary, do little to advance their careers.

The expectation to please vs being kind

Women are conditioned to prioritise others’ needs over their own, often leading to people-pleasing tendencies in the workplace. This manifests in several ways:
♦ Women frequently take on non-promotable tasks that do not contribute to career growth.
♦ They are expected to deliver direct feedback more gently than their male counterparts.
♦ They face resistance when attempting to set firm boundaries.

However, there is a crucial distinction between being nice and being kind. Being nice involves pleasing others at the expense of one’s own needs, while being kind means acting with respect while maintaining firm boundaries. Kindness is a strength in leadership, yet many women default to niceness, fearing that assertiveness will make them unpopular.

Caroline Farberger’s unique perspective

Caroline Farberger, a board executive and former CEO, offers a rare perspective on gender bias. Having transitioned from male to female, she has experienced first-hand how behavioural expectations for women are far stricter than for men. As a man, Farberger did not notice gender disparities in leadership. However, as a woman, she found it significantly harder to make her voice heard and influence decisions. Her experience underscores how the “corridor of acceptable behaviour” is far narrower for women, reinforcing the double bind.

The likeability vs competence trap

Women often find themselves caught between two extremes:
♦ If they are warm and agreeable, they are liked but not seen as competent leaders.
♦ If they are assertive and direct, they are seen as competent but unlikeable.

This dichotomy explains why women frequently receive feedback such as, “You should smile more,” while men do not. The expectation that women must be warm and nurturing creates an additional burden that their male colleagues do not face.

Emotion vs logic: A false stereotype

Women’s passion and emotional intelligence are often misconstrued as weakness. If a woman speaks passionately about an issue, she is labelled as “too emotional”. In contrast, a man expressing the same passion is perceived as strong, visionary, and committed.

A chief human resource officer (CHRO) in India’s logistics sector once remarked, “Women too emotional? Huh, you should see the men in the boardroom. If they don’t get their way, they slam their fists on the table, shout, and jump up.” Women are simply penalised for expressing emotions differently.

Emotion in the workplace should not be dismissed outright. Positive emotions such as pride, passion, and happiness contribute to a strong workplace culture. Even frustration — often leading to tears in women due to biological differences — should be acknowledged rather than penalised. Emotional intelligence should not just be expected from women but from all leaders.

The ‘Mummy Penalty’

Motherhood presents additional hurdles for women. If a woman has children, she is often perceived as less committed to her career, leading to fewer promotions. If she does not have children, she may be expected to take on extra work because she has “no family responsibilities”.

Meanwhile, men with children are often viewed as responsible and leadership-ready.

A man introducing himself as “Sanjeev, father of three” is seen as a family man.

But if a woman says, “I’m Anita, mother of three,” the assumption is that she is more focused on family than work.

Changing the narrative: Systemic solutions

The double bind is not about individual women needing to change — it is about transforming the narratives that hold them back.

Women should not have to walk a tightrope between competence and likeability while men lead freely on their own terms.

Data-driven insights on gender equity

Diversity boosts profitability
♦ Companies in the top quartile for leadership diversity earn an additional nine percentage points in EBIT.
♦ Credit Suisse found that companies with at least 15% female senior managers had over 50% higher profitability than those with less than 10% female representation.

The gender pay gap persists
♦ The Global Gender Gap Report 2022 predicts it will take until 2154 to achieve gender pay parity at the current rate.
♦ Research in Denmark shows that wages decline in professions as female representation increases.

Meritocracy is a myth
♦ Women outperform men on 17 out of 19 leadership skills yet face higher scrutiny and fewer leadership opportunities.
♦ Overconfidence is often mistaken for competence, leading to the promotion of less qualified men over competent women.

Practical steps for organisations

To create an equitable workplace, companies must establish fair rules, systems, and cultures:

Review recruitment & promotion criteria

♦ Ensure hiring processes value competence over confidence.
♦ Avoid over-reliance on self-confidence as a hiring criterion.

Close the gender pay gap

♦ Conduct annual pay audits to detect and correct salary disparities.
♦ Implement transparent salary structures, as seen in Iceland.

Address the ‘Mummy Penalty’

♦ Provide equal parental leave and encourage men to take it.
♦ Recognise caregiving skills — negotiation, multitasking, emotional intelligence — as valuable leadership competencies.

Redefine leadership criteria

♦ Promote leadership pathways for women through mentorship and training.
♦ Value diverse leadership styles, not just traditional “masculine” traits.

Foster inclusive work cultures
♦ Create safe spaces for women to develop leadership skills.
♦ Encourage sponsorship and mentorship for women in leadership.
♦ Breaking the double bind requires awareness, conversation, and systemic change. It is not about being nice — it is about being kind, strong, and effective. Only when we dismantle these outdated narratives can we create workplaces where women and men have equal opportunities to succeed.

(Mette Johansson is a leadership coach, author, and gender equity advocate, helping organisations cultivate inclusive and authentic leadership.)