Underpaid. Undervalued. Overlooked for promotions. Harassed. Without flexibility. Without support.

You likely know a woman who’s left, or seriously considered leaving their job because of one or more of these factors. You might be one yourself.

These issues have real, personal impact. They are also systemic.

According to research from Women Rising, nearly three quarters of women considered leaving their job in the last 18 months and over a third actually did. More than one in five considered leaving the workforce altogether. 

So, what is the right way for an organisation to respond at a time of female exodus? With a new initiative? A band-aid solution? 

Siri is recognised internationally as an expert in advancing gender equality in the workplace. (Image credit: Sirichilazi.com)

And if women are leaving for so many different reasons, where do you look first?

According to Siri Chilazi, a senior researcher of Harvard Kennedy School’s Women and Public Policy Program, the instinctive response is a generic retention strategy, rolled out in the hopes of stemming the flow.

This is also the wrong approach, says Siri, and risks making things worse.

Siri’s work focuses on identifying and testing concrete solutions that close gender gaps at work across hiring, performance evaluations, promotions, pay, and progression opportunities.

“When all of your past leaders are white men, it inadvertently says, ‘anyone who doesn’t fit that mould perfectly is not fit to be a leader’.”

She explained that women’s reasons for leaving aren’t down to a lack of ambition or ability, but because the systems around them make staying harder than leaving.

“You hear things like, ‘I haven’t seen enough evidence of a woman’s executive presence’, and judge that based on the style of past leaders. When all of your past leaders are white men, it inadvertently says, ‘anyone who doesn’t fit that mould perfectly is not fit to be a leader.’ That’s a structural disadvantage and a structural way of discriminating against women.”

Where once there were overt legal barriers to women’s employment – namely, not having full workplace rights until the mid-80s – today, workplace gender gaps can be more discreet.

Inequality manifests in who gets assigned “promotable work”, how performance evaluations translate into career advancement and pay increases, who progresses in the hiring process – who even gets an interview.

Women, especially in managerial roles, are resigning at disproportionately higher rates than men, and the impact extends far beyond their individual exit. Remaining female staff feel the ripple effect of one less role model, mentor and advocate with decision-making power. 

While 73 percent of women say the female leaders above them are supportive, almost one in five couldn’t answer the question, reporting having little or no female leaders above them at all.

This absence matters. Female staff go from seeing women – seeing themselves – in executive spaces to imagining them. This puts women at a structural disadvantage, says Siri.

“If you have two people of the same background who are equally talented, competent and capable, but one of them looks around and sees versions of himself everywhere, whereas the other doesn’t see anyone who looks like her, that already tilts the playing field in favour of one over the other.”

The cycle continues with early-career women left navigating systems not designed with them in mind, often without a blueprint from anyone who has successfully navigated those systems before.

“Be like a doctor. Only once they have the diagnosis of what they’re actually trying to fix do they prescribe medicine.”

How can women be reasonably expected to progress or feel supported in workplaces when the systems shaping progression, pay and performance continue to work against them?

Creating a fairer, more inclusive workplace is both the right thing and the smart thing to do. Research shows that businesses benefit on all fronts by having a diverse workforce.

According to Melbourne Business school, gender-diverse teams are 39 percent more profitable, owing to increased innovation and understanding of broader demographics.

Yet, when you learn that only 8 percent of women are thriving at work, with the majority saying they are “just functioning” or “hanging on by a thread”, it’s easier to understand why many women considered leaving their workplace in the last 18 months.

“When people are in environments that aren’t safe, in terms of harassment, in terms of physical safety; when people are in environments where they can see that they’re undervalued – either because they’re underpaid or their talents are not utilised to the fullest, or they see other people unfairly getting advancement opportunities that they don’t have access to – they leave.”

Treating these vastly different problems as a one-dimensional issue is where most employers go wrong. Instead, Siri urges leaders to adopt a mindset more commonly found in medicine than management.

“When you go to the doctor’s office, they don’t just start handing out pills at random,” she says. “They run a battery of tests, ask about your symptoms, they collect your family medical history, all so they can create an accurate diagnosis of what’s wrong with you.”

“Only once they have the diagnosis of what they’re actually trying to fix do they prescribe the most effective medicine. You have to be like a doctor.”

That same logic can be applied to enacting structural change in the workplace, says Siri.

She encourages organisations to dig down and analyse what’s driving the numbers and effects they’re seeing so intervention can be targeted, not tokenistic.

“If we create a new product, we’re obsessively tracking the profitability, metrics, usage patterns, everything. It’s actually a matter of applying the same approaches we’re already using for the core business and applying those to how we think about systemic change.”

For example, three quarters of women cited being talked over or interrupted in meetings, so leaders looking to make their meetings more fair can collect simple data on who is speaking.

If a big gap is recognised between staff, a small but impactful intervention would be to incorporate a round robin where everyone has a space to offer their thoughts.

Becoming a more inclusive leader starts with introspection, and failing to diagnose the real cause of women’s attrition carries serious consequences for the individual, organisation and the economy.

Big problems don’t always have costly solutions. Training is expensive. Changing your behaviour is free.

And when organisations finally ask the right questions, women staying – and thriving – becomes a far more realistic outcome.