Why Are We Still Here? The Uphill Battle of Women, and Especially Women of Color, in Leadership Roles in 2024

The Tightrope Walk of Leadership as a Woman

Imagine walking into yet another meeting, prepared, passionate, and determined to lead. You already know the feedback: “Be direct, assertive, take charge.” But there’s another, quieter voice speaking to you, lingering from past experiences and feedback: “Soft skills are key; know when to defer, and when to listen. Don’t bring your full authentic self to these meetings. Be kind, but not too kind.” For many women in leadership roles, this dance is constant.

I hear it constantly: I’m either “too direct” or “not direct enough.” If I step back to let others shine, I’m told I’m not showing up strongly enough, that I’m fading into the background. But if I step forward, leading with strength and clarity, I’m “too intense,” “too visible.” The mixed messages are endless, and I know I’m not alone in this exhausting cycle.

There’s a certain relentlessness in being hyper-aware of every moment—always managing how I show up, feeling stuck between two parts of myself that can’t fully coexist in the same space. In each meeting and each conversation, I code-switch, adjusting my words, tone, and approach depending on the audience and context. This isn't the same as situational leadership, where you tailor your approach to the capability and willingness of the person you are delivering the message to; instead it is changing how you express your personality moment by moment. And I know that other women are feeling the same weight, walking the same tightrope, adjusting their voices and presence moment by moment. This constant modulation is tiring in a way that goes beyond regular workplace stress. It’s the kind of weariness that accumulates from navigating a culture that still holds women to higher, often contradictory standards. In spaces where men are “strong leaders” by default, women balance an invisible burden: being likable yet decisive, collaborative yet in control, visible yet humble, delivering tough messages while being gentle. It’s nearly impossible to be all of these things at the same time.

The leadership pressures for women, particularly women of color, are not just about skill or performance but about navigating these intangible, shifting expectations. I hope this helps you understand the compounded challenges women face in leadership: the demand to code-switch, the expectation to balance work with home responsibilities, and the near-impossible “glass cliff” roles often reserved for us. Through these stories and the research that supports them, I’ll explore what it means to constantly navigate the exhausting, invisible tightrope of leadership as a woman in 2024.

The Double Bind: A Rigged Game of Expectations

One of the most persistent challenges women leaders face is the “double bind”—an unfair, almost impossible set of expectations. Women are supposed to be both assertive and nurturing, confident but not arrogant, and capable without coming across as “too ambitious.” Eagly and Karau (2002) coined the term “role congruity theory” to describe this phenomenon, explaining that society’s traditional image of a leader clashes with the stereotypical image of a woman. When women exhibit the assertiveness and confidence often associated with effective leadership, they’re often labeled “bossy” or “too direct” (Parker, 2015).

The contrast with male leaders is stark. Research by Brescoll and Uhlmann (2008) showed that men who display anger or directness are seen as competent and powerful. Meanwhile, women who demonstrate the same emotions are viewed as unstable or aggressive. The message seems pretty clear: men get praised for qualities that help them lead, while women face backlash for the same things. This sets women up to be endlessly “correcting” themselves to avoid being labeled negatively and, in some cases, apologizing for their very existence in spaces they have every right to be in, which, besides being exhausting, and can limit their leadership effectiveness.

Code-Switching: The Exhausting Art of “Fitting In”

In many spaces, women, especially women of color, are pressured to “code-switch.” This means adjusting their behavior, speech, and even appearance to align with the dominant culture’s norms, which often don’t reflect their own. Code-switching is less about professionalism for women of color; it’s a survival strategy to avoid triggering racial stereotypes. Yim and Clément (2021) discuss this dynamic in their research on acculturation, explaining that adapting to a dominant culture can cause significant psychological strain, particularly when it involves concealing aspects of one’s identity.?

For women of color, this need to constantly adapt is compounded by stereotypes that frame their authentic behavior as “aggressive” or “angry” (Crenshaw, 1991). Research by Holder, Jackson, and Ponterotto (2015) found that Black women in corporate leadership often feel they must code-switch to navigate these stereotypes, but the emotional toll is high. Women of color are left feeling disconnected from their identities and alienated in their workplaces. And this isn’t just a burden, it’s a barrier to advancement, as it keeps them from being able to fully participate and lead with authenticity.

The Second Shift: The Unseen Job After Work

In addition to the exhausting demands of code-switching, women are also expected to pull a “second shift” at home and do so effortlessly. After spending their workdays adapting their language, tone, and behavior to meet the expectations of a professional environment, many women return home only to face an entirely different set of responsibilities. Society’s expectations remain stubbornly stuck in societal norms of the past, with the weight of household responsibilities and childcare often falling on women, regardless of their career status. This double duty stretches their time and energy and reinforces the unrealistic ideal that women should excel in both arenas without missing a beat. The tension between the two is palpable. For female leaders, especially women of color, balancing these responsibilities becomes an almost impossible bar to meet.?

Although workplaces have made significant strides in offering flexible work arrangements (in part because they were forced to do so because of COVID-19), women still face the expectation that they should manage household and family responsibilities. This “second shift,” popularized by Hochschild and Machung (2012), refers to the unpaid labor women perform at home, from childcare to household management. Despite women’s increased representation in the workforce, they continue to shoulder a disproportionate amount of domestic work, even when they work full-time.

Interestingly, this expectation isn’t placed on men, who are rarely expected to choose between career advancement and family commitments. The Pew Research Center (Parker, 2015) found that women are significantly more likely than men to adjust their careers for family responsibilities. This double duty takes a toll on their professional ambitions, as they often have to decline promotions or scale back their hours to accommodate family needs. This burden can be even heavier for women of color (Bianchi, Casper, & Berkowitz King, 2000).

What’s most frustrating is that this choice between professional growth and personal responsibility is rarely forced upon men. This reinforces the idea that a woman’s primary responsibility is to manage the household. This expectation keeps women from reaching their full potential, not because they’re less capable but because the system continues to assign domestic responsibilities to them disproportionately.

If I had a quarter for every time someone asked me, ‘How do you manage it all?’ I’d be rich, and the answer would still be, ‘I’m not managing it by myself.’ I am thankful to have a husband who fully shares the burden of supporting our family, not just financially, but also with the things that need to be done around the house; I recognize my situation for the blessing it is and also how this arrangement is incongruent with our societal norms.

The Glass Cliff: Precarious Leadership in Times of Crisis

The “glass cliff” is a term that describes how women are often promoted to leadership roles during times of organizational crisis, effectively setting them up for failure (Ryan et al., 2016). I explored this concept in an earlier article, but I think it is worth revisiting here. When companies struggle, they’re more likely to turn to women for leadership, perhaps because they represent a “change” from the status quo. However, these positions are high-risk and often lack the resources necessary for success. When things go wrong, these women can end up taking the fall (Ryan et al., 2016).

For women of color, the glass cliff is even steeper. Research by Cook and Glass (2014) indicates that Black and Latina women, in particular, are more likely to be promoted to CEO positions in struggling organizations (Cook & Glass, 2014; Ryan et al., 2016). These high-stakes roles come with amplified scrutiny and often less support, making it challenging to turn the situation around (Ryan et al., 2016). ?If their efforts don’t translate into instantaneous success, these women face career setbacks that can be hard to recover from. The glass cliff ironically reinforces a cycle of failure and underrepresentation in leadership instead of signaling progress.

The Mental and Emotional Cost: Burnout and Beyond

The combined effect of these pressures, constant self-modulation, double workloads, and precarious leadership roles, has a profound impact on women’s mental health and well-being. Steele, Spencer, and Aronson (2002) discuss the stress of stereotype threat, where women, particularly women of color, experience anxiety and self-doubt in environments where they feel judged by stereotypes. This stress, like compounding interest, gets more significant by the moment, inevitably leading to burnout, sometimes compelling outstanding women to put their careers in the backseat.

The mental toll is substantial. When women feel isolated, unsupported, and under the proverbial microscope, it impacts their job satisfaction and future career growth. Many women, understandably, exit these leadership positions, not because they lack the capability to lead but because the personal costs of staying are too high. For women of color, the pressures are compounded by racial biases, making the path to leadership particularly rough.

Breaking the Cycle: What Organizations Can Do

Recently, we witnessed this phenomenon play out on the national stage with Vice President Kamala Harris. Regardless of one’s political stance or opinion on her qualifications, Harris publicly experienced many of the challenges outlined in this discussion. She was often scrutinized for being “too assertive” or “too soft,” walking the tightrope between showing strength and avoiding negative stereotypes associated with women in power, especially women of color. The mixed messages were relentless—if she took a strong stance, she was “aggressive,” and if she deferred or took a collaborative approach, she was “weak” or “not up to the task.”

Additionally, Harris constantly needed to code-switch to reflect the expectations of different constituencies while being held to a higher, sometimes contradictory standard than her male counterparts. This very public example highlights the systemic and perpetual biases that continue to shape perceptions of female leaders and underscores the urgency for organizations to attempt to address prejudice and redefine what effective, inclusive leadership looks like in modern society.

There are many other public examples of female leaders being put in these situations if you just start to watch for them.

So, how do we move past this? Honestly, I hate that we’re still talking about this in 2024. We need to take a hard look at the systemic barriers perpetuating these biases and implement meaningful changes. Here are some strategies in no particular order that could make a difference:

• Reevaluate Leadership Assignments: Companies need to be aware of the glass cliff and ensure that women and women of color are not only brought in during crises but are also given the support, resources, and mentorship needed to succeed. Assigning high-stakes roles to diverse leaders should be a deliberate, well-supported process, not a “last resort” option in times of turmoil.
• Work-Life Integration Across Genders: Companies should emphasize that flexible work policies, paid parental leave, and accommodations for kid sick days, doctor’s appointments, and the occasional emergency dentist visits are for everyone, not just women. This could help shift the cultural expectation that only women should make sacrifices for their families.
• Address Bias with an Intersectional Approach: Training on unconscious bias should include discussions about intersectionality. Crenshaw (1991) introduced this concept to highlight how overlapping social identities compound experiences of oppression. Understanding these nuances can help managers and leaders better support women of color, who often face unique challenges not captured by gender or race alone.
• Create Stronger Support Networks: Mentorship and sponsorship programs are crucial for retaining women leaders. By connecting women to mentors who can guide them through organizational challenges and advocate for their success, companies can create a more supportive environment for diverse leaders.
• Challenge yourself: In the heat of the moment, ask yourself, ‘Would I be responding in the same way if a man acted/spoke/showed up in this way?’ ?if the answer is no, make sure you react accordingly. It starts with all of us deciding to respond differently to chip away at this unfair stereotype.

Why It’s Time to Change the Landscape

In 2024, the fact that we’re still discussing these barriers reminds us how much work is left for us to do. The double bind, the second shift, code-switching, and the glass cliff all represent a deck of cards that is still stacked against women, especially women of color. These challenges persist because of longstanding biases and expectations that hold women to a different standard than men. We aren’t that far removed from the women’s suffrage movement if you think about it, or even from women were considered the property of their husbands... and the world has, and has not, changed in many respects since we fought for the right to vote.

Changing this requires more than just adjusting individual policies. It demands a cultural shift that values inclusivity and equity, where women are given the space to lead authentically and are not expected to bear a disproportionate burden. Only then can we begin to bulldoze the impossible hill that women, particularly women of color, are still forced to climb.

As I think about my daughter entering the workforce one day soon, my biggest fear is that she’ll encounter the same biases, broken systems, and limiting stereotypes that women have been fighting against for generations. I don’t want her to have to navigate a world where she’s constantly expected to change who she is to fit into a narrow, often contradictory, mold. My hope is that this article brings these issues to light in a way that challenges people enough to question and reevaluate the standards they hold women to.

Real change starts with recognizing the weight of these expectations and committing to reshaping workplaces where future generations, like my daughter, can lead authentically, without fear of judgment or penalty for simply being themselves.

?

References

Brescoll, V. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2008). Can an angry woman get ahead? Status conferral, gender, and expression of emotion in the workplace. Psychological Science, 19(3), 268–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02079.x

Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2014). Above the glass ceiling: When are women and racial/ethnic minorities promoted to CEO? Strategic Management Journal, 35(7), 1080–1089. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2161

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573

Hochschild, A. R., & Machung, A. (2012). The second shift: Working families and the revolution at home (Rev. ed.). Penguin Books. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Second_Shift.html?id=G1ZS3bU3ZMUC

Holder, A. M. B., Jackson, M. A., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2015). Racial microaggression experiences and coping strategies of Black women in corporate leadership. Qualitative Psychology, 2(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000024

Parker, K. (2015, October 1). Women more than men adjust their careers for family life. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2015/10/01/women-more-than-men-adjust-their-careers-for-family-life/

Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., Morgenroth, T., Rink, F., Stoker, J., & Peters, K. (2016). Getting on top of the glass cliff: Reviewing a decade of evidence, explanations, and impact. ?https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.10.008

Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 379–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0

Yim, O., & Clément, R. (2021). Acculturation and attitudes toward code-switching: A bidimensional framework. International Journal of Bilingualism, 25(5), 1369–1388. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069211019466