For years, female CEOs appointed to lead struggling companies have been described as being perched on a “glass cliff.” The term describes a phenomenon where women are more likely to be appointed to leadership roles in times of crisis, setting them up for failure. Yet, new research shows that women are not more likely to be appointed to CEO during times of crisis, potentially altering views of female leaders.
The study, published in The Leadership Quarterly, analyzed CEO appointments in all publicly held U.S. companies listed on major exchanges from 1998 to 2022. Researchers examined data on 10,348 CEOs, including 526 women, and found that women are no more likely than men to be appointed CEOs at struggling companies. In fact, the study revealed the opposite: as a company’s financial stability improves, the likelihood of a woman being appointed CEO increases.
The results challenge the popularly held notion that female CEOs are more likely to be appointed to roles with a high likelihood of failure. This narrative has been fueled by the media, which is quick to highlight the glass cliff when a woman is appointed CEO of a struggling company. Some high-profile examples of CEO appointments labeled glass cliff appointments include: Linda Yaccarino’s appointment as CEO of Twitter (now X Corp) amidst the platform’s struggles, Stephanie Pope’s role as Boeing’s first female chief executive following a public relations crisis involving a plane malfunction, Sue Gove’s position as the first female CEO of Bed Bath & Beyond as the company neared bankruptcy or Jane Fraser taking the helm at Citigroup during a turbulent period. While these cases seem to fit the the glass cliff paradigm, they are isolated examples.
In reality, people may be more likely to notice when a woman is placed in a precarious role, while similar circumstances involving men often go unnoticed. For example, Starbucks recently appointed a male CEO following declining sales and operational challenges, and Intel appointed a man as CEO last year amid financial struggles in the semiconductor industry. Yet, the CEO’s gender was not highlighted in either of these appointments.
The “glass cliff” term was coined in 2005 in the United Kingdom after researchers observed that struggling companies were more likely to appoint women to their boards. This sparked debate over whether the phenomenon extended to CEO appointments, with earlier studies providing mixed findings. More recently the term has also been applied to minority leaders. The latest research provides the most comprehensive analysis of gender and CEO appointments in the U.S.
Why does debunking the glass cliff matter for women? For one, perpetuating the idea that women are more likely to be set up for failure reinforces negative stereotypes about women’s leadership abilities. It implies that women are only given opportunities when the odds are stacked against them, diminishing their successes and contributions. Others have suggested that women are hired in times of crisis because they tend to have better communication skills—again, this suggests that women don’t possess a complete set of leadership skills, and perpetuates stereotypes that men and women are more different than they really are.
Furthermore, if women believe they are likely to be placed on a glass cliff, they may hesitate to pursue leadership positions. This research debunking the phenomenon could encourage more women to step into leadership roles without fear of being set up for failure.
The research findings also provide a reason for optimism. Some academics of have previously suggested that women’s appointment to precarious leadership positions was because women were viewed as more expendable. This study provides evidence to refute that notion, at least with regard to female CEOs.
It’s important to note that these results do not suggest that women are given equal opportunities as men to become CEOs. Instead, it merely says women are not more likely to be appointed to lead struggling companies as compared to successful ones. According to the Women’s Business Collaborative, women make up only 9% of CEOs of the largest 3000 publicly traded companies in the U.S. (the Russell 3000). There is still a long way to go before women are appointed to leadership roles in both struggling and thriving companies at the same rate as men.