Why More Women Aren't At the Top of Companies

Women often are told that all they need to do to advance to the top of companies is acquire experience and show their competence. Sylvia Ann Hewlett, founder and president of the Center for Work-Life Policy, understands why this is often easier said than done.

An economist by training, Ms. Hewlett has found that women have great difficulty following the same career path as men. The author of "Off-Ramps and On-Ramps: Keeping Talented Women on the Road to Success," which will be published next month, Ms. Hewlett surveyed close to 2,500 women and 650 men and found that most women take some time off work or intentionally avoid advancing for a while so they have time to care for children and elderly relatives.

Getting back on the fast track is difficult. And the growing number of jobs that require workweeks of 60-plus hours and 24/7 attention to clients is leaving women farther behind and costing businesses valuable talent.

Some companies -- many of them members of the Hidden Brain Drain Task Force, which Ms. Hewlett launched with others -- are experimenting with new ways to harness women's ambitions. Here are excerpts of a conversation with Ms. Hewlett:

Nonlinear Careers

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Most people thought that by today, more than three decades since many women launched careers in business and the professions, there would be gender parity in senior ranks. Why hasn't that happened?

MS. HEWLETT: Everyone thought if you just eliminated barriers and women filled the pipeline, over time they'd be fairly represented in top jobs. But this hasn't happened mostly because women aren't male clones. They find it very difficult to replicate the competitive-white-male career path. They carry the bulk of responsibilities on the home front for children and also for elderly parents. So fully 60% of women have nonlinear careers.

WSJ: How would you describe a nonlinear female career?

MS. HEWLETT: About 37% of women take an off-ramp at some point in their career, meaning they quit their jobs -- but just for an average 2.2 years. Another substantial number take scenic routes for a while -- intentionally not ratcheting up their assignments. For instance, 36% of highly qualified women have sought part-time jobs for some period, while others have declined promotions or deliberately chosen jobs with fewer responsibilities.

WSJ: Can women who off-ramp get back on track easily?

MS. HEWLETT: That's the problem. The vast majority of them -- 93% -- want to return to work, for financial reasons and because they like their careers. But once a woman stops working for even a year or two, opportunities to re-enter are few and far between. Just 73% land jobs, and 24% of these end up having to take part-time jobs.

WSJ: Do women who take scenic routes hurt their chances for advancement as well?

MS. HEWLETT: These women also are stigmatized as not serious enough and often find it hard to advance.

Extreme Toll

WSJ: You've coined the term "extreme work" to describe the increasing number of jobs that require 60-plus workweek hours as well as other demands such as 24/7 attention to global clients and lots of travel. Does this trend also hurt women's chances to advance?

MS. HEWLETT: Extreme jobs are taking their toll on the health and emotional well being of men and women. Even though a majority of people in these jobs say they love the challenge and adrenaline rush they get from them, they also suffer more ailments, such as high blood pressure and anxiety, as well as relationship problems with spouses and children they have hardly any time for.

Extreme jobs take a special toll on women, who are being left behind. Just 4% of women in our U.S. survey hold extreme jobs -- which is bad news for anyone interested in female progress. Extreme workers are the "A" team -- the bench strength for future leaders. The data show that highly qualified women aren't afraid of hard work and responsibility. But it's hard to sustain a 73-hour workweek if you have serious responsibilities in other parts of your life.

WSJ: Why should employers care?

MS. HEWLETT: For reasons that range from a tightening job market to retiring baby boomers, companies can't afford to lose experienced, well-qualified women. They aren't easily or cheaply replaced. Top executives and heads of law firms and other service companies are [just] becoming aware of how many talented women are being forced off the leadership career track -- usually at early or midpoint stretches when men catch a wave of promotions that position them for top jobs later on.

WSJ: Is there male resistance to addressing women's different timetables and paths?

MS. HEWLETT: For some business leaders, accommodating women's nonlinearity is difficult because it means an end of an era. It means men give up their last remaining competitive advantage over women. I am not arguing that there is any kind of male conspiracy at work, but the traditional model of putting in long workweeks year after year enables men to "shake off" most women as they move up the ladder.

So women's best chance for accommodation is an increasingly powerful business case. The war for talent is heating up. Women are the best and most obvious candidates to fill the void left by aging baby boomers and other demographic changes.

Finding Help

WSJ: How are some companies responding to the need to retain women?

MS. HEWLETT: Lehman Brothers started to create flexibility and virtual workplaces because of concerns about security issues that started with the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. They had 6,000 workers who needed to work at least temporarily from new places.

And then came the bird-flu scare a few years ago, which deepened the company's commitment to figure out how to enable employees to be effective from their homes and other remote locations by using an array of technology. But these initiatives helped retain female as well as male talent they might otherwise have lost. A man whose wife was relocated to Florida was able to follow her there and keep working for Lehman. The company also has found that 60% of employees who work from virtual locations report productivity gains.

WSJ: Does Lehman have other programs aimed at keeping talent?

MS. HEWLETT: Lehman's Encore program was started two years ago to help women who'd quit jobs in the financial sector re-enter the work force again. No one is promised a job at Lehman, but participants attend panel discussions where they hear about new trends in their industry, such as the heightened regulatory climate, and they submit their risumis. Those who don't get hired still get to network and come away with renewed confidence.

WSJ: Where else can women who've slowed their careers refresh their skills and get mentoring?

MS. HEWLETT: Many other companies, including Ernst & Young, Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, have programs geared at retaining women. And business schools and law schools now are starting programs aimed at talented people who want to restart careers. Wharton business school in March ran a weekend program sponsored by UBS for women with M.B.A.s who hadn't worked for two to seven years. There were courses on finance and marketing and advice on career switching, followed by a day at UBS's New York office. No one was guaranteed a job, but a lot of contacts were made.

WSJ: Besides creating virtual workplaces, what other things can companies do that convince women not to opt out?

MS. HEWLETT: Time Warner through its Breakthrough Leadership program has sought to sustain women's ambitions by giving them a place to bond, learn new skills and mentor one another. There have been nine of these sessions since 2003, attended by 229 women. Graduates of the first class gave each other tiaras to remind each other not to wait to be rewarded for their industriousness and crowned by others but to pick their heads up and manage their own careers. Many of those graduates still have the tiaras hanging in their offices.