Black women still face a glass cliff, but fixing workplace systems can change that

Originally published on Triple Pundit on 29 July, 2024.

 

After the murder of George Floyd in 2020 led to calls for racial equity at work, organizations eager to demonstrate their commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion hired more Black women into leadership positions. After decades of facing barriers to advancement and leadership — a concrete ceiling — it seemed like Black women were finally making progress. But many of them were set up to fail and placed in unstable positions in organizations that were floundering. These experiences are characteristic of the glass cliff, a phenomenon where women and people of color are more likely to be appointed to leadership positions during periods of organizational crisis compared to those of stability and growth.

Leading an organization through a time of crisis is a difficult job for any leader, but Black women face additional burdens navigating (in)visibility, the pressure to perform and intersectional stereotypes,

Black women in leadership roles contend with both hypervisibility and invisibility. As studies show, they are penalized more harshly for failures, and their performance is scrutinized more than others. This is especially true when Black women are the first of their race and/or gender to be in a leadership role. There is an increased pressure to perform because of how it could reflect on other people like them. At the same time, Black women leaders deal with invisibility and must work harder to be seen and taken seriously as a leader because they do not match the prototype of the white male leader. This can make it more difficult for them to gain respect, buy-in, and support from their peers and subordinates.

Additionally, because of racial and gender stereotypes such as the “strong Black woman” and phrases like “Black girl magic,” two tropes that portray Black women as uncharacteristically strong and resilient, they may be expected to take on impossible tasks without the support and resources they need to succeed. Given the additional barriers that Black women leaders face, many work twice as hard to be successful, sacrificing their mental health and experiencing increased stress and burnout.

What causes the glass cliff?

The causes of the glass cliff are complex and varied, but these are two reasons that stand out: status quo bias and stereotypes about gender and leadership.

Status quo bias. When an organization is in crisis, leaders want to signal a change from the status quo and use the appointment of a “new kind” of leader (e.g. a non-white man) as a symbolic demonstration of that change. In support of this theory, researchers conducted an experiment and found that the glass cliff effect only surfaced when a company was described as historically male-led. When the company was described as historically led by women, the glass cliff disappeared.

Stereotypes about gender and leadership. It’s been well documented that people tend to associate stereotypically masculine traits, such as assertiveness and independence, with leadership more so than stereotypically feminine traits like cooperation and caring — a phenomenon called “think manager-think male.” Interestingly, research also shows a “think crisis-think female” phenomenon where leaders with stereotypically feminine traits are seen as more suitable to lead an organization in crisis. This sets women up to be appointed to glass cliff positions.

How can organizations prevent the glass cliff?

Organizations can mitigate the glass cliff phenomenon and give Black women and employees from other marginalized groups a fair chance to succeed in leadership positions. They must be willing to do three things: make a long-term commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion through succession planning, address barriers and biases in hiring, development and promotion, and create accountability structures within the organization.

Develop inclusive succession planning. Future-thinking companies create a strategy to identify and develop high-potential talent to take on leadership positions when they become vacant. Organizations that do not have a succession plan are most at risk for perpetuating the glass cliff because they must make a quick decision to fill a role with little planning and preparation — a perfect recipe for bias.

Even when companies have succession plans, failure to incorporate diversity, equity and inclusion into the process can perpetuate barriers and inequality that keep women and people of color from advancing into leadership positions. An inclusive succession plan recognizes the need for a diverse and dynamic workforce and actively works to identify and develop high-potential talent from marginalized groups. It seeks to remove barriers to advancement and provide support through leadership development programs and access to sponsors and mentors.

Ultimately, this planning builds an intentionally diverse pipeline of talent to choose from when a leadership position becomes available, helping organizations avoid subjecting Black women to the glass cliff, make consistent progress toward their diversity, equity and inclusion goals, and create smoother transitions between leadership.

Root out bias from hiring, performance appraisals and promotion processes. Evaluation processes such as hiring, performance appraisals and promotion are susceptible to bias that can disadvantage people from marginalized backgrounds. So, it is important to create clear guidelines for how to evaluate others. The more subjectivity there is in the evaluation process, the greater chance there is of bias, so it’s key to base decisions on objective, measurable and job-relevant competencies and criteria.

For hiring, evaluators can use structured interviewing, a human resources tool where candidates are all asked the same competency-based questions and then rated using a rubric to assess their performance on each competency. Bias can also be present during the performance appraisal process. Studies show differences in the amount and quality of performance feedback that employees from marginalized groups receive. Black women in particular receive the least amount of quality feedback compared to other groups.

Equip managers with the skills they need to be objective by hosting training on how to evaluate performance and give high-quality feedback that is clear, actionable and focused on behaviors instead of personality traits. Creating bias-free evaluation processes can help organizations mitigate the glass cliff by shutting down stereotypes and bias.

Measure and track progress. As the saying goes, what gets measured gets managed. Collecting data and tracking progress is also a great way to create accountability and transparency for diversity, equity and inclusion goals, both of which are essential for success.

It’s important to assess the disparity between demographic groups across all facets of the employee life cycle so you can evaluate what is working and what is not. For example, in analyzing performance appraisal and promotion data, it is important to consider whether rates of promotion are similar across demographic groups and whether the quality and amount of feedback is similar. Take it a step further and take an intersectional approach to the data, considering whether there may be disparities across more than one axis of identity.  Measuring and tracking progress can help to proactively identify challenges that could lead to a glass cliff scenario.

The bottom line

Restricting Black women’s advancement opportunities to times of poor organizational performance is not a sustainable business or diversity, equity and inclusion strategy. Organizations play a crucial role in ensuring that Black women have access to the same opportunities for development, advancement and leadership as white men. The glass cliff is not inevitable. We can make it an outdated notion.