When something is broken, we fix it. When something no longer works, we replace it. Yet, for decades, leadership has remained built on outdated, male-coded structures that leave women at a disadvantage. The problem isn’t that women are incapable of leading. It’s that leadership is built on the wrong foundation. If leadership continues to fail half the population, then the solution isn’t asking women to continue to adapt. It’s time to change leadership itself. To reimagine it entirely rather than simply adding women to a broken system.
Right now, society operates under the Gender Roles Inhibiting Progress (GRIP) model. This model explains how social role theory and the theory of planned behavior work together to reinforce gender norms, shaping women’s behavior through subjective expectations, self-efficacy and stereotypes. The GRIP model makes one thing clear: women aren’t failing at leadership. They have made undeniable progress through the four waves of feminism. Yet, this progress has all taken place within the constraints of the GRIP model. Instead of continuing to ask women to adjust — to mold themselves into leadership structures that were never designed for them, we need to ask a bigger question: what if leadership itself was redefined? How do we finally shatter the glass escalator?
The answer lies in what is called the Integrated Leadership Model (ILM). Instead of prioritizing dominance and competition, ILM values collaboration, adaptability and ethical decision-making- leadership traits that have been historically overlooked. Instead of forcing women to conform to outdated leadership molds, ILM reshapes leadership itself, ensuring that all leadership styles are valued. The model is built on three core pillars: redefining leadership, overhauling institutions and shifting cultural leadership expectations. Let’s explore how these pillars can create a system where leadership is not only more inclusive but truly reimagined.
Redefining Leadership
The GRIP model reveals that leadership structures, especially those seen in the workplace and on college campuses, were never designed with women in mind. Historically, leadership has been defined by dominance, competition and assertiveness, traits that are traditionally associated with men. This creates a double standard: when women exhibit
these traits, they are perceived as “too aggressive” or “unlikeable,” yet when they act more collaboratively, they are seen as lacking authority.
Instead of asking women to adjust their leadership styles to fit outdated expectations we need to redefine leadership altogether. The ILM proposes a solution by valuing collaboration, adaptability and ethical decision-making with leadership just as much as confidence and assertiveness.
To put this into action universities should introduce mentorship and networking reform where universities establish formal leadership mentorship programs that connect women with faculty mentors, industry leaders and alumni who can help them develop leadership skills and secure high-level positions in student government, pre-professional societies and research opportunities. This ensures that women and underrepresented students aren’t simply present but have equal access to executive leadership positions.
Institutional Overhaul
Redefining leadership is essential but the structural barriers that remain preventing women from accessing high ranking leadership positions need to be addressed separately. Research shows that in every level in leadership structures, men are favored even when women are not just equally, but more qualified. On the college campus, this is a common trend seen in student government, where men dominate executive positions despite equal or greater female participation.
One commonly overlooked source of bias comes from faculty recommendations, career advisors and hiring pipelines. This bias causes guys to be more commonly described as “strategic” and “visionary,” while women are labeled “hardworking” and “reliable.” The gender schema established from this influences who is encouraged to apply for leadership roles, who receives the more competitive scholarships, and who is recommended for high impact research opportunities.
The ILM proposes mandatory faculty and career advisor bias training. Additionally, universities should require transparency in the criteria for leadership selection for student government, pre-professional clubs and research assistantships. In tracking gender representation, a system of accountability will be established for institutions to prevent disparities.
Shifting Cultural Leadership Expectations
The GRIP model doesn’t simply shape leadership pipelines but also shapes how students perceive themselves as leaders. From childhood, girls are taught to behave in a way that is “helpful,” “agreeable” and “collaborative,” while boys are encouraged to take risks and assert authority. This doesn’t just impact careers but also how individuals apply themselves for leadership positions in college.
A major cultural barrier is the likeability trap. This trap is the expectation of women acting competent and warm in leadership instead of acting in a way that will cause them to be labeled as “too aggressive” or “unapproachable.” This is reinforced with stereotypes like the “cool girl” that pressure women to appear effortlessly laid back and accommodating. These stereotypes make women more hesitant to apply for leadership positions, less likely to negotiate their worth, and more likely to accept a behind-the-scenes role.
To counteract this, the ILM reshapes leadership culture on campus, ensuring that leadership development supports all students without forcing them to conform to outdated gendered expectations. One way that this would be seen is through normalizing women’s leadership styles. If universities were to spotlight diverse leadership styles through campus panels, media coverage and leadership to normalize diverse ways of leading. This would normalize the different ways of being a leader and ensure that confidence and authority start to be seen as not exclusively being “masculine” traits.
On a Personal Level
To transition from the GRIP model to the ILM is going to take time and the collaboration of institutions. This change starts on a personal level with members within institutions calling out for this change. It’s going to take your voice and your actions along with that of your friends’ voices and actions. If you notice men dominating executive board positions while women are assisting in administrative or support roles, speak up and advocate for co-leadership models as well as an evaluation of leadership selection criteria to ensure women also have access to high-ranking roles.
Support the women around you who are stepping into leadership roles by amplifying their ideas in meetings, sharing their work and advocating for their contributions to be recognized. Run for leadership positions yourself. You don’t have to be the perfect applicant to apply or take up space. Leadership isn’t about fitting into an outdated mold but reshaping the mold entirely.
Change won’t come overnight, but each step taken makes the next one easier. Leadership structures that were built without women can be rebuilt. This time, with women. The system isn’t just broken, but outdated. It’s time to stop trying to fix it. It’s time to rebuild.