Statistics show women are less likely than men to ask for a raise or a promotion. What would happen to the face of leadership if nobody had to ask?

We all know that there is still a huge discrepancy between women and men when it comes to getting promotions and raises. The issue has been analyzed, debated, and white-papered exhaustively. We also know, thanks to so many studies, that the underrepresentation of women in leadership is a direct consequence of that discrepancy.?

We even know many of the factors that contribute to the discrepancy. They include occupational segregation (women are funneled into lower-wage work such as nursing and teaching while men are encouraged to go for higher-earning careers in finance and engineering) and the motherhood penalty (women see their wages shrink after becoming mothers while men get raises after becoming fathers). Also, there is no shortage of unconscious bias that stealthily sways both women and men into believing that women are simply not meant for the top jobs.?

As I wrote in To the Top, “The reasons for the lack of parity in compensation are complex and multifactorial. It’s not just that companies are intentionally setting out to lowball the women they hire, although that does happen. The reasons are also cultural and historical. Many women recoil at the thought of having to ask for a pay increase.”?

I am not one of those women. For as long as I can remember, just as I fiercely advocate for my clients, I also have never hesitated to make my voice heard, to put myself forward for an assignment, or to push for a promotion or a pay raise. But I realize I am not the norm—and that people don’t always appreciate my unvarnished ambition. (Luckily that kind of disapproval doesn’t faze me. Would a man with the same go-getter qualities ever be viewed as pushy or aggressive?)?

In my book and in this newsletter, I make the case for why it’s important for women to reject structural roadblocks that clearly, albeit often tacitly, direct us to put our hands down and step aside. We have the power to modernize outdated practices in pursuit of a more equitable workplace. This is not the work of one person or one gender. Systems and expectations take years to unwind and require everyone’s participation.

That’s why I’m interested in new strategies that companies can use to systematically increase opportunities for women and other minorities. One of them, known as opt-out, is about revising organizational choice architecture so that qualified women are automatically put in the pool for promotions, committee assignment, speaking engagements, etc., and must opt out if they do not want to be considered. Rather than relying on women to put themselves forward or lean in, opt-out means they’re automatically opted in. A study (yes, another study!) by the National Bureau of Economic Research, found that an opt-out promotion scheme could increase the number of women who apply for promotions, allow organizations to take advantage of a broader talent pool, and remove biases built into the system.?

At my company, Russell Reynolds Associates , we’ve successfully used a similar approach when it comes to our executive committee: Once a partner has enough shares to stand for election, he or she automatically becomes a candidate. Every year, all names are sent to all shareholders, who vote for three people to serve for a three-year period. Candidates can recuse themselves, but the nominations are not subjective. Rather, they are based on quantifiable guidelines that trigger a candidacy.?

Is your company opting for opt-out? How so? Please share any similar strategies from organizations you’ve encountered that are helping to level the playing field.