As long as they're qualified...

One thing I hear repeatedly from venture capital partners, recruiters, and others in positions to hire is that they don’t care whether the candidate is a man or woman. They just care that they’re qualified. More often than not, the people making these statements are trying to convey what they assume is an unbiased approach to hiring. They’re not thinking about gender. Instead, they’re only hiring based on experiences, skills, and sheer merit—may the best person win. 

And yet, the winners continue to be almost solely white men. Women still only comprise 5% of CEOs at companies across the country; and roughly 7% of the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. So why—if so many people are happy to hire a qualified woman leader—do organizations rarely actually do so? 

A key part of the answer is not in intention, but approach. The qualifications that boards, venture capital, and recruiting firms consider when hiring for CEO positions are usually based on who has been successful in the role in the past. And bias baked into the system ends up excluding capable, qualified applicants who have different but equally valuable experiences. By rethinking the narrow definitions of CEO-qualifying experiences, organizations can access a growing pool of more than qualified women candidates who are primed for success.

Glass ceilings and invisible walls for women leaders

In my work with startups, I’d often bring up the “ketchup example” to talk about market opportunities and the need for diversity of thought. Essentially, where people keep their ketchup depends on where they live. A lot of people store ketchup in the refrigerator, but depending on where you grew up, ketchup is stored in the pantry. And when you’re out of ketchup? You look for another condiment in the same place—the fridge or the pantry, bringing very different solutions.  

C-level leaders aren’t condiments, but when it comes to hiring them, the same logic applies: When we need replacements, we go to the same places we’ve looked before. In the world of public companies, the primary qualification for hiring a CEO is someone with previous CEO experience. Boards may also prioritize candidates who have served on the board of a public company. With few women meeting these criteria, the CEO talent pool has long favored men. (That said, a study out of Harvard Business Review shows that the number of women eligible for CEO positions increasing as more women obtain board positions). 

In private companies, similar dynamics are at play. A 2017 Pew Research study found that women made up just 10% of the CEO candidate talent pool. That is, when recruiters looked for potential candidates to fill CEO roles, there were few women in the positions that usually lead to CEO such as COO, operational executives, and division presidents. Companies tend to look for CEOs from roles that are connected directly to financial performance. Women in leadership, however, more often work in HR, legal, marketing, and administrative roles. The Wall Street Journal summed up the problem: The barrier isn’t only a glass ceiling at the very top, but also an invisible wall that sidelines them from the kinds of roles that have been traditional stepping stones to the CEO position. 

Rethinking Experience

For organizations that want to diversify their leadership, rethinking what constitutes “experience” to more accurately reflect candidate capabilities is paramount. I want to be clear: I’m not advocating for companies to lower their standards. Instead, I believe that re-evaluating the type of experience that matters and what makes an effective leader opens organizations up to increased opportunities for top talent (potential new markets and increased revenue as well).

For example, companies usually require CEO candidates to have hands-on P&L experience. However, there are multiple ways to gain an understanding of company financials. A candidate with a proven track record of cross-functional leadership will most likely manage and hire experts to fill in experience gaps, while also learning more on the job. Women rank very high on having a learning mindset, meaning not only is she willing to put in the work to learn, but she is also willing to consider various viewpoints and data to find the best solution. Or consider the priority that companies and business culture place on the command-and-control style of leadership. Steve Jobs was revered for it and was incredibly successful. But based on what we know now on what makes successful leaders, is it possible he, his company AND his employees could have been much more successful?

Research increasingly shows that strong corporate decision-making rests in a leader’s ability to listen and absorb multiple points-of-view. This is something that women are exceedingly good at. In fact, in a study of team performance from MIT, the groups made of mostly women were more successful. That’s because the women had a better understanding of what their team members were thinking and feeling, and that social perception translated directly to smarter decisions. 

I don’t care whether the person is a man or woman as long as they’re qualified. It’s time to reconsider how biased systems inform what we think of as qualified. By opening our minds to the different—but valuable experiences and leadership skills—of talented women leaders, we can diversify our CEO ranks, and reap the rewards that follow.