The Banality of Gender Disparity in Corporate Power: Introduction – Systems, Laziness, and the Predictable Failure of Good Intentions
A Reckoning for Men in Leadership
If you're a man in any leadership role, it's time for an uncomfortable truth. For decades, we've all been comfortably nestled within the illusions of neutrality and meritocracy, which we falsely believe govern our corporate environments. We tout diversity and equality as core values while meticulously preserving a system where, for example, I was a leader in a globally dominant consulting firm (in this series, we will call it The Firm) where men occupied 77% of roles. In all its banality, the truth is that the system isn't neutral—it's designed, curated, and maintained by men who refuse to see it for what it is and ignore the cost of their inaction.
In my over 20 years of leadership in consulting and technology, I, too, played my part in this farce. Here's the short story: incented through bonuses in the many thousands per head for recruiting people I knew into whatever Firm I worked for, I played a critical role in shaping our substantial group in The Firm to 77% male. I recruited the people I knew who almost invariably looked like me. Male. They, too, recruited people they knew who invariably looked like them. Male. Together, we built and sustained male-dominated ecosystems that came to stand as a vast unflappable ugly monoculture..
The kicker? It's entirely within our power to fix it. The issue isn't a shortage of talent or a pipeline problem. It's our unwillingness, as men, to take ownership of the solution.
Let’s take a quick look at the landscape, before we dive in deeper into each part later, in indivirual articles.
Part 1: Men Are Both the Problem and the Solution
When I first took time to find and see the statistics on my teams at The Firm—believe me, it took a great deal of effort to get the numbers; they weren't posted in the break-room—it was an eye-opener: 77% of roles in technology consulting were filled by men; certain sub-departments were as high as 93% male. I didn't immediately come to it, but as I chewed it repeatedly, for a shamefully long time, I finally went to the most obvious conclusion: men were the problem, and men were the solution. It's not like there wasn't half the world screaming this to me every day.
Occam's razor
At The Firm, men made up 77% of the organization and over 90% of the Executive. We had done all the hiring. We had literally created this stupefyingly lopsided organization. It is fundamentally sexist and discriminatory—at least from a moral perspective.
We made the lazy, uninspired choices that produced these numbers and kept these numbers in place.
Let's debunk a few of the myths that we, as male leaders, have conveniently used to keep the balance tilted in our favor:
"It's best to let women fix this problem."
We expect women to lead the charge on equity while keeping them perpetually underrepresented. This is a catastrophic error in logic. If you don't have the numbers or influence to initiate change, you're unlikely to shift the entire power structure. Men, who occupy most of the roles in environments like technology consulting, are precisely the ones who need to initiate change. At The Firm, men were 77% of the oragnzaiton; men were 77% of the potential change agents.
"Gender-driven targets aren't legal."
A complete misinterpretation of legal constraints. During my tenure, I consulted with our legal experts who clarified that setting targets to increase gender diversity is within legal boundaries as long as every candidate receives a fair opportunity. You should obviously consult with yours. Mine were surprised I even needed to ask.
"There aren't enough qualified women."
This one's as insidious as it is lazy. Companies like ours held substantial market power. We could attract the best by offering meaningful compensation, visibility, market power, and incredible career growth. We made markets. Nothing but our complacency kept us from remaking the labor pool or simply buying all the available stock. And we had every reason to do so. Data continually show that diverse teams drive financial performance. Harvard studies demonstrate that companies with gender-diverse leadership perform better, with as much as a 21% boost in profitability. Lazy.
Part 2: A Personal Reckoning
When I took an honest look at my role in the disparity, I realized I hadn't just contributed—I had accelerated it. For years, I referred the people I knew professionally—men—and worse, watched a statistically significant number leave under my watch. Every hire and every referral I made was part of the cycle, a self-replicating loop that doubled down on a male-dominated culture. My choices were predictable, and predictability, as I have often said, is a recipe for fragility.
And for what? If not to lose our souls, then to lose on revenue, to diminish the value of the markets we operated in. Let's discuss "fit," one common path of abnegation and shadow cost. A false measure, fit too often rationalizes bad and inequitable choices and equates to sameness. At The Firm, this sameness created a sterile monoculture that, rather than being antifragile, easily cracked under pressure, lacking the resilience that true diversity fosters. It's not that the Firm fell apart, but it sucked at a lot of things that required creativity, attentiveness, and a crack in the facade. The impact of this sameness isn't just abstract; it's visible on the bottom line. Gallup research links gender diversity to as much as a 14% revenue increase in gender-diverse teams. Plus, diverse teams are more fun.
Part 3: The Concrete Benefits of Gender Equity
If all the above sounds theoretical, let's get into gritty numbers. Gender diversity isn't just a social initiative; it's an economic one. My pitch for a gender rebalancing program was straightforward: diverse teams, particularly in leadership, drive higher margins. McKinsey's findings reinforce this: companies with high gender diversity in leadership are 35% more likely to outperform their less diverse peers(redacted_plan).
The business benefits are unequivocal. Diverse teams bring cognitive diversity, which accelerates problem-solving(redacted_plan). Our clients noticed and questioned our lack of diversity, often asking why a team dedicated to solving complex, innovative problems was 90% male. Imagine the irony of promoting ourselves as "innovative" while refusing the one change guaranteed to yield innovation.
Part 4: The Strategy for Fixing It—Without Excuses
My proposal for fixing this imbalance at The Firm was simple but audacious: we would only hire women for several years until parity was achieved. With a 20% annual attrition rate and only a little tailwind, we could resolve the problem in about three years. If this sounds radical, consider this: men have had decades of unchecked opportunity, resulting in the same mind-numbing homogeneity we have today.
To ensure this was sustainable, I recommended setting clear hiring goals, defining retention strategies, and outlining a straightforward promotion pipeline. The goal was to bring on women and retain and elevate them.
Part 5: Men Need to Own This
Here's the reality: without active, sustained effort from men, gender equity will remain a mirage. And by men, I mean those of us in leadership, those of us comfortable with our privilege. The Harvard Business Review confirms that diverse leadership teams are more innovative and better equipped to solve complex problems.
The road to parity isn't paved with passive allyship. We, the men who have perpetuated this imbalance, are the only ones who can correct it. It's on us to make the decisions, drive the change, and take the economic risk for a more equitable—and ultimately more successful—workforce.
About the Author
Robert Synak is a leader in Fortune 500 consulting and technology firms with over 20 years of experience. Having held senior roles in both business operations and strategy, he led transformation initiatives that reshaped corporate structures and championed large-scale diversity programs. Today, Synak challenges the complacency of male-dominated industries by advocating for systemic change in corporate gender equity.
References
Harvard Business Review. (2019, February 11). Research: When Gender Diversity Makes Firms More Productive. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2019/02/research-when-gender-diversity-makes-firms-more-productive.
McKinsey & Company. (2020, May 19). Diversity Wins: How Inclusion Matters. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters.
Gallup. (2018, January 20). The Business Benefits of Gender Diversity. Retrieved from https://www.gallup.com/workplace/236543/business-benefits-gender-diversity.aspx.
Catalyst. (2019, October). Women and the Future of Work. Retrieved from https://catalyst.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WomenFutureofWork_Oct2019.pdf.
U.S. Agency for International Development. (n.d.). Developing a Business Case for Gender Equality. Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/engendering-industries/gender-equality-guides/business-case.