Lean Out

"Why should women mimic the very traits that uphold the systems they wish to dismantle?" Marissa Orr challenges the mainstream corporate feminism approach and poses a different question: What if it’s the workplace, not women, that actually needs to change?

1. Mimicking Masculine Assertiveness Won’t Solve Workplace Inequality

Corporate advice often urges women to adopt traditionally masculine traits to navigate workplaces. Orr argues this isn’t progress—it’s a sidestep.

Feminine qualities such as empathy and collaboration are undervalued in favor of traits like aggression and decisiveness, seen as “strong” leadership. Advice such as “ban bossy” positions assertiveness as the cure-all for workplace inequality, but it requires women to abandon some of their most effective leadership strengths.

Instead of asking women to conform to masculine archetypes, workplaces should redefine what successful leadership looks like. Women who mimic aggressive styles don’t necessarily challenge workplace norms; they often perpetuate the same systems that disadvantage other women.

Examples

• Girls who show assertiveness are labeled “bossy,” while boys are praised as strong future leaders.
• Encouraging women to emulate behaviors like interrupting or dominating conversations overlooks their existing leadership strengths.
• Women leaders who succeed using masculine traits rarely focus on creating inclusive policies for others.

2. Stop Asking Women to Lean In and Start Asking Why They’re Leaning Out

Corporate feminism argues women lack ambition for leadership, but it seldom asks whether they might have valid reasons for declining these roles.

Orr highlights the uneven distribution of unpaid domestic labor as one factor. Women tackling both professional and household responsibilities often reject demanding careers, preferring balance over burnout. Yet conversations about changing workplace environments to better accommodate women’s realities are rare.

Instead of programs encouraging women to pursue high-level roles, corporations should consider what their workplaces could do to make leadership attainable and appealing without additional personal sacrifices for women.

Examples

• Despite holding equivalent job roles, women still spend almost one hour more per day than men on housework.
• Flexible jobs that allow remote work or nontraditional hours remain limited in corporate culture.
• Conversations urging men to “lean in” and share household duties are almost nonexistent.

3. Confidence Alone Cannot Shatter the Glass Ceiling

The idea that women fail to rise in the workplace because they lack confidence misses the mark. Orr relates confidence to self-trust—not brashness or bravado.

Traditional corporate advice urges women to speak in statements, stop apologizing, and eliminate doubt. However, these “uncertain” behaviors—hesitation, asking questions, and apologizing—often reflect thoughtfulness and emotional intelligence. These traits add value to teams and decision-making processes.

Rather than teaching shallow confidence, workplaces should learn to value behaviors associated with genuine trust and mindfulness. Confidence isn’t about mimicking louder voices; it’s about embracing self-authored styles different from traditionally male norms.

Examples

• Women acting “confidently” can still face criticism for being “emotional” when voicing opinions.
• Apologizing, often framed as weak, can build bridges during tense negotiations.
• Confidence workshops often focus on male-centric traits, such as power poses or vocal dominance.

4. Workplace Relationships: From Connections to Transactions

Corporate culture prioritizes results over relationships, reducing meaningful connections into mere alliances for personal gain.

Men are often associated with networking prowess. But Orr questions, is corporate networking truly about building relationships or simply furthering self-interest? Research shows men thrive in competitive environments but often falter in collaborative ones. Women tend to value collaboration, yet these tendencies are rarely celebrated in corporate cultures.

To create equitable environments, organizations must move away from transactional networking and promote genuine team-oriented collaboration.

Examples

• A Washington University study found men perform better in competitive settings, while women succeed in collaborative ones.
• Corporate mentorship for women often focuses on “how to network,” ignoring systemic biases against their approach.
• In team challenges, women’s efforts to maintain harmony are overlooked compared to visible individual contributions.

5. Why Women Excel in School but Fall Behind at Work

School rewards discipline, effort, and results, which aligns with common biases in how girls are raised. But corporate success often depends less on merit and more on politics.

In schools, hard work translates into good grades, but in workplaces, being seen matters more than actual contributions. Corporate evaluations often rely on subjective impressions instead of objective performance markers. Women, conditioned to focus on merit, lose out in systems rewarding visibility over value.

What if performance assessments used objective metrics like orchestras using blind auditions for fairness? Transparent evaluation processes could tangibly address workplace inequities.

Examples

• Women represent over half of college graduates yet hold under 5% of Fortune 500 CEO positions.
• Blind auditions in orchestras tripled the number of women musicians over two decades.
• Performance reviews often prioritize “presentation skills” over measurable contributions, favoring men.

6. Corporate Power Glorifies Authority Over Influence

Corporate structures celebrate authoritarian power, the kind tied to dominance and control, while undervaluing influence-based leadership often associated with women.

Orr reveals studies showing many women find power derived from authority less appealing than influence-driven teamwork. Yet corporations rarely promote alternatives to hierarchical power models. This leaves women unmotivated to climb ladders weighed down by expectations that don’t align with their values or goals.

Redefining power structures to include influence-based policies could make leadership appealing to more women.

Examples

• Studies show men associate “leading” with hiring/firing decisions, while women link leadership to collaboration.
• Influence-driven leaders, like community organizers, are often disregarded in corporate contexts.
• Google’s top-performing teams cited inclusiveness and psychological safety, hallmarks of influence-led environments.

7. Real Change Happens by Adjusting Systems, Not People

Structural changes—not self-help workshops—are what transform gender representation in workplaces. Denmark’s success with organ donation practices illustrates this well.

Shifting default organ donor policies drastically increased donation rates. Likewise, instead of retraining individual behaviors, corporate systems should adjust their frameworks—like offering tailored policies for diverse employee needs.

Workplace equality campaigns should focus on changing the environment instead of merely urging women to adapt.

Examples

• Changing menu calorie disclosures didn’t lower obesity rates; reforming food environments might work better.
• Leadership programs often overlook factors like maternity leave when framing women’s professional goals.
• Denmark boosted organ donor rates from 4.5% to 74% after tweaking opt-out vs. opt-in processes.

8. Companies Must Empty Their Male-Centric Playbooks

The Lean In model assumes progress comes through women adopting male-centric habits, such as assertive posturing or relentless career ambition. Orr argues such advice misses the bigger picture.

Real equity asks workplace systems—not employees—to adapt. Companies should replace advice dictating behavior with action addressing inconsistent work-life policies. Flexible hours, onsite childcare, and valuing diverse leadership styles could profoundly improve workplace gender equality.

Moving forward, companies will need to align their goals with strategies that genuinely empower all employees—not just those thriving under outdated norms.

Examples

• Google found creating safe spaces for diverse workstyles increased creativity and efficiency.
• Facebook’s unlimited paid leave policy improved retention rates among parents.
• Flexible work policies during the pandemic highlighted the flaws of rigid corporate structures.

9. Empowering Diversity: The Bottom Line

True gender equity amplifies workplace innovation and productivity. Companies that embrace diversified leadership and collaboration outperform those rooted in outdated hierarchies.

By shifting corporate mindsets to value distinct talents and perspectives, workplaces unlock growth opportunities. Gender parity isn’t just a moral push; it’s a proven route to higher profits and happier employees.

Examples include workplaces fostering collaboration, ditching traditional power structures, and championing personalized work habits—creating conditions where everyone thrives.

Examples

• Inclusive teams generate 35% better revenue, as shown in McKinsey reports.
• Collaborative initiatives result in tangible innovation gains across industries.
• Companies with female CEOs report enhanced communication across departments.

Takeaways

1. Advocate for workplace policies prioritizing inclusion over conformity, such as parental leave and team-based goals.
2. Redesign performance review systems to grade objective results rather than impressions or politics.
3. Uplift collaboration by valuing influence-driven leadership styles equally to authority-focused approaches.