Women’s leadership, career progression, and mid-career advancement continue to be major challenges across the pharmaceutical, engineering, digital infrastructure and medical device industries. Over three years, the WiLD (Women in Leadership Development) Programme – created by Kennedy Insights in partnership with Career Vision – has generated one of the most comprehensive datasets on what holds women back at mid-career and what helps them accelerate.
From the outset, WiLD was designed not only as a development experience but also as a research-led exploration of a clear question: What is slowing or blocking the advancement of capable women at mid-career, and why does this pattern appear so consistently across industries? Below are the seven key findings from WiLD’s most recent research showing the systemic patterns affecting women’s advancement across industries, roles and organisational structures.
Good work is not enough
Across the WiLD research, a consistent pattern emerged. Many women operated from the belief that strong performance would naturally be recognised and rewarded. This mindset often reflected earlier experiences in education and early career stages, where effort and achievement were closely aligned and where high-quality work reliably produced clear outcomes.
Organisational life does not work in this way. The quality and impact of work are not automatically noticed. Busy leaders are not tracking achievements in the background. Progression depends not only on delivering strong results but also on being able to communicate those results clearly and credibly.
The women who advanced most effectively were not simply the strongest performers. They were the ones who could explain the value of their work, frame the impact and make their contribution visible in a grounded, professional way. Visibility in this sense is not self-promotion. It is a leadership responsibility.
International research mirrors this finding. Studies from Harvard and Catalyst show that women often expect performance to lead naturally to visibility, while men assume performance must be communicated. Over time, this difference in behaviour creates a measurable gap in opportunity.
High-quality work builds trust and credibility. However, it does not drive progression unless others understand the impact of that work. Being able to speak to the outcomes you deliver is part of leading, not an optional extra.
Readiness is often treated as a prerequisite rather than a developmental outcome
Women across WiLD cohorts described waiting to feel fully ready before pursuing larger roles. This was not a reflection of limited ambition. It reflected deeply embedded patterns around accuracy, responsibility and the desire not to overpromise.
International evidence reinforces this tendency. HP’s internal research found that men apply for roles when they meet most of the criteria, while women tend to wait until they meet all of them. LinkedIn’s global hiring data shows the same trend.
When readiness is treated as something that must be achieved before stepping forward, women’s progression slows. Readiness grows through stretch and exposure, not through waiting for perfect conditions.
Non-promotable work carries a significant career cost
Women commonly carried non promotable or culture-stabilising tasks such as onboarding, emotional support, conflict smoothing and early problem detection. These tasks are essential, yet they are seldom recognised in promotion discussions. Instead, they create a form of organisational indispensability that holds women in place.
Research from Carnegie Mellon and the University of Pittsburgh shows that women are more frequently asked to take on non promotable work and are more likely to accept it. Over time, this leads to women holding the cultural backbone of organisations while being overlooked for strategic advancement. Indispensability does not translate into mobility.
Belonging has a profound influence on ambition
One of the most powerful findings in WiLD was the relationship between belonging and ambition. When women experienced genuine belonging, characterised by trust, support and connection, their ambition increased notably. They were more willing to pursue stretch roles, to be visible and to take strategic risks.
Global research echoes this. Deloitte’s work shows that women with strong peer networks are considerably more likely to aspire to senior leadership. Stanford’s research demonstrates that belonging increases willingness to take strategic risk.
Belonging is not merely a cultural preference. It is a driver of ambition.
The confidence gap is more accurately an identity gap
A central insight from WiLD was that women did not lack confidence in their capability. They questioned whether their leadership style aligned with traditional leadership archetypes.
Before WiLD, slightly more than half of participants described themselves as confident to lead. After the programme, that figure rose to ninety six percent, despite no change in underlying capability.
Research from INSEAD and Harvard shows that women and men display similar levels of confidence in assessments of competence, yet women are less likely to identify with traditional leadership models.
The barrier is not confidence. It is identity.
Female leadership talent is abundant while recognition remains limited
Across WiLD cohorts, many women were already operating well above the expectations of their formal roles, shaping culture, driving outcomes and carrying responsibilities that extended far beyond their job descriptions. Despite this, they were not always recognised as leadership talent.
This finding is echoed globally. Studies from the Peterson Institute, the International Labour Organisation and McKinsey show that women consistently outperform men on the leadership competencies most associated with effective teams and strong organisational performance.
The challenge is not the availability of talent. It is the visibility of talent. Talent is not missing. It is being missed.
Organisations often admire one model of leadership while rewarding another
A consistent theme across WiLD was the gap between the leadership qualities women admired and the behaviours organisations rewarded. Women valued fairness, steadiness, collaboration, reflection and empathy. Organisations often rewarded visibility, decisiveness and short-term delivery.
Zenger Folkman’s global research supports this. Women outperform men on most leadership competencies that contribute to long-term organisational health, yet these behaviours are not consistently recognised or rewarded. Until organisations align their reward structures with the leadership qualities they claim to value, the leadership pipeline will remain misaligned.
Where progress is most likely to occur
Across three years of data, two areas consistently emerged as the most powerful levers of sustainable change.
The first involves the development of a stronger and more grounded leadership identity among women. When women understand their leadership identity and stop measuring themselves against outdated archetypes, their ambition, visibility and presence grow rapidly. Identity, in this sense, creates momentum.
The second lever concerns organisational alignment. Progress requires organisations to reward the leadership qualities they claim to admire. If fairness, steadiness, collaboration and empathy strengthen teams, these qualities must be reflected in promotion and recognition decisions.
When signals and rewards align, organisational culture and leadership pipelines shift quickly.
The opportunity
The combined evidence from WiLD and international research leads to a clear conclusion. The challenge is not the absence of female leadership talent. It is the absence of structures that fully recognise and reward it. When women anchor themselves in a confident and authentic leadership identity, and when organisations reward the leadership that genuinely strengthens culture and performance, progress accelerates in a meaningful and sustainable way. There is no shortage of talent. There is a shortage of recognition and alignment. Both can be addressed.
