Are Women Really Becoming Less Ambitious? Not Quite

Every year, Lean In and McKinsey & Company release Women in the Workplace, the largest study of women in corporate America. But this year, the findings sparked a hot debate online about whether or not women are actually becoming less ambitious (spoiler: they’re not), after the report found a growing “ambition gap” between women and men.

Here are some of the most surprising stats:

80% of women want to be promoted, compared to 86% of men
69% of early-career women want to move up, versus 80% of early-career men
84% of senior women still want to advance, compared to 92% of their male peers

Women want to grow. But they’re navigating workplace systems that make it harder to do so.

Entry-level women are far less likely to be managers, far less likely to receive stretch assignments, and only 31% have a sponsor—compared with 45% of entry-level men. And nearly a quarter of women who don’t want a promotion cite personal responsibilities as the barrier, a reflection of the ongoing care and support gap, not a lack of drive.

To dig into the findings, I sat down with Rachel Thomas, CEO and cofounder of Lean In, and Megan McConnell, Partner at McKinsey & Company. Together, we unpacked what the data actually means for working women today, why young women enter the workforce more ambitious than men under 30, and how workplace systems chip away at that ambition over time.

Why do you think women are now less likely than men to want a promotion, even though both groups are equally committed to their careers?

Rachel Thomas: “It’s a tough time to be in the workplace right now. It’s a tough time to be on the planet as a woman right now, and then also in the workplace. So, when only half of companies say they’re prioritizing women’s career advancement, and 20% say they’re not prioritizing women’s advancement at all, then we’re seeing rollbacks of policies and programs that are particularly beneficial to women—like remote and flex work and formal sponsorship programs. Women are feeling that, and it’s hard to remain optimistic in the face of a lack of investment and commitment in you and your career. And then of course, we saw a direct link between when you get equal manager support, that career gap falls away. So one of our big messages is: behind the ambition gap is a support gap.”

Megan McConnell: “We were surprised by the data ’cause we hadn’t seen [an ambition gap] before. So, we reran the numbers many times to make sure that it was accurate. It isn’t all that surprising, but it’s important not to blame women for that because they are equally motivated to do their best work. They are committed to their careers. But when something seems less possible (we know that promotion rates just aren’t as high for women) and you get less support, it’s not surprising that the ambition gap exists.”

Are women becoming less ambitious, or are they simply responding to workplace systems that limit their advancement?

RT: “Yes, [the ambition gap] exists. But it’s [because of] the system, not the women. When you’re feeling a lack of commitment, when you’re not getting the same level of support, when you’re far less likely to have a sponsor, less likely to be put up for a promotion, less likely to get a stretch assignment, and even less likely to be introduced to someone who could help your career—and entry-level women are getting less exposure and encouragement to use AI by their managers—that’s a wake-up call because that’s gonna shape work in dramatic ways, and we do not want women to be left out of that.

And then when you see the data, it’s a pretty clear link between women working remotely and flexibility stigma. They’re far less likely to get promoted when they work remotely, far less likely to get a sponsor—but it’s not the same for men. And then for the 11th year in a row, we have the broken rung at that first step up to manager.

This is not in the report; it’s outside of the data, but I think the straw that broke the camel’s back is that women are looking out into the world and they’re seeing headlines and social media posts that undermine women’s leadership. They’re seeing things out in the zeitgeist that are tearing women down, and then they’re in their workplaces, and they are starting to really feel like the support is rolling back. And they’re right.”

MM: “When we looked at what would actually close the gap, it’s career support and sponsorships, which are things actually within the company’s control.”

RT: “We’re not asking them to change the world. We’re asking them to change their systems internally. That’s a solvable problem.”

Entry-level women are far less likely than men to be managers, which puts them on a slower promotion track from day one. What advice would you have for entry-level women who might be feeling disheartened by the data?

RT: “I hope that this finding is more validating than disheartening. I hope that a lot of early career women read it and go, ‘That’s not me. I’m gonna even be louder. I’m gonna go for it even more.’ But I think one of the things early career women could do differently is a risk-benefit assessment whenever they’re deciding to do something. I think a good recommendation is to start with everything that could go well. Imagine the best that could happen, then sit down and think about what might not go well. And nine times out of 10, if you approach taking career risks this way, most women will see clearly that going for it makes a lot of sense.

Another thing is, we can be that helpful to one another early in our careers. You could be a really amazing mentor and maybe even a more valuable mentor to someone who’s just like a year behind you, because you’ve just been there. So, I think entry-level women [should be] looking for more opportunities to be allies and to lift each other up.

One final thing: challenge bias when you see it. If you see something you think is biased, or you see something that looks really biased, just ask the simple question: ‘Why do you think that? Or what made you decide that?’ Because there’s a lot of research that suggests just asking someone to reflect on what they think alone can actually help them check their own bias.”

MM: “I also think that this piece on formal sponsorship programs is important. But at its core, sponsorship is about relationships, and often the best sponsoring relationships are organic.

I think that entry-level women and women at any stage of their career need to be more ambitious in getting sponsors for themselves and starting that sponsorship conversation, because men in their careers are much more likely to do that and to proactively seek out sponsorship. Those are things that can still be done, whether or not your company has formal programs.

And the second thing I would add is the power of peer networks and women’s group texts. It can really help you feel less alone and raise ambition by celebrating each other. It’s not a replacement for anything systemic, but I do think—in this moment, more than ever—we need to be helping each other.”

RT: “I think it’s incredibly important that companies are tracking outcomes. So who’s getting sponsorship? Is it leading to promotion? Who is getting that leadership training? Is it leading to stretch opportunities and advancement? Who’s getting trained on AI? What impact is that gonna have?

So, looking across the whole organization and at all the opportunities and supports that lead to career advancement, and making sure that women are getting them equally. For organizations, I think it signals to women that there’s an investment in their advancement, and I think it signals to everybody that there’s an investment in fairness.”

Senior women say they're being passed over and don’t see a path to the top. How can organizations rebuild trust with women who feel the system doesn't support them?

RT: “One thing that really stood out for me was that senior-level women are much less likely to get leadership training. Like, you’re already a leader, and you’re at the cusp of senior leadership, at the top, and yet men are more likely to get formal leadership training, which is probably taking them to the next level. I think organizations can invest in making sure leadership training is distributed equally among leaders in their organization.

And then there’s something going on with managers. For some reason, senior-level men are getting more support from their managers, which means that senior leadership is, for some reason, overlooking the women who are on their teams. The data is showing that top leaders in organizations appear to be putting more emphasis on the men on their teams’ advancement than the women’s.

If your most senior leaders are getting it right, then they’re modeling the right behaviors that will hopefully trickle down and have a positive impact on everybody.”

MM: “Women are doing additional work in the workplace, especially when it relates to career development conversations and supporting employee wellbeing and managing team dynamics to have high-performing teams. But too often, those things aren’t formally recognized in promotions or in the criteria of success in an organization. And so, I think companies can really signal that they value those contributions by formally recognizing and rewarding them in performance evaluations.

And the second thing is, we did a lot of CHRO interviews, and what struck me was this idea of also giving women the same supports as men get once they’re in those roles. That could look like formal support, leadership training, and the same number of chances to fail that men have.

It’s not just about the opportunity, but if you aren’t perfect right out the gate, how is your company actually supporting you in that role? Helping you grow into it versus a woman getting promoted and within a year, she’s out.”

You found that mothers are just as ambitious as women without children—something many people wouldn’t expect. What’s driving that?

RT: “I think we often assume mothers are less ambitious. The conventional wisdom is always women check out when they start to have a family, or women check out when they’re working remotely. But earlier research we’ve done shows that women say that they’re able to do more at work. And there’s actually a positive correlation between working flexibly and remotely and ambition because it lets them do more and it makes it easier for them to bring their whole selves to work.”

After everything you’ve uncovered, what’s the one takeaway about ambition that you want women to walk away with?

RT: “Entry-level women under 30 are actually more ambitious than entry-level men under 30. So, what’s interesting about that is women are entering the workforce bright-eyed and energetic and really wanting to advance, and then they start to face a workplace that isn’t fair and doesn’t offer as many opportunities, and then you start to see differences in ambition. But I think that’s a really important point that young women are actually mighty ambitious.”

This interview has been edited and condensed.

For more nuanced conversations about ambition, check out Girlboss’ new podcast, Ambition 2.0, hosted by Amanda Goetz. Each week, we explore what it really means to “have it all” in work, family, identity, and self… and if it’s actually worth it. You'll hear from hardworking women who’ve walked the tightrope of ambition. They'll share their costly mistakes, lessons learned, and practical tips for how to have it all and actually love what you have. Tune in on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, and everywhere else you get your podcasts.