t

os
Reviving the One Woman Campaign:
Addressing a Clogged Leadership

rP
Pipeline NA0622

INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL
Grishma Shah, Manhattan College

yo
Srinivas R. Pingali, Indian Institute of Management Udaipur
Angela R. Grotto, Manhattan College

CASE SYNOPSIS
op
In late 2017, Peri Malhotra, Head of Employee Development at Quatrro Global Services (QGS) was
concerned about the future of the One Woman campaign started at the firm two years prior. She led the
initiative with her direct manager, Alok Narain, Executive Vice President of Human Resource and
Development. Despite a concerted effort, Malhotra remained one of the few senior women executives at
the firm. The One Woman campaign was launched in 2015 with the aim of attracting, retaining, developing
and most importantly, helping women ascend the leadership ladder. The program was well received by
tC

participants, generating substantial buzz among women employees, but Malhotra had also heard some
grumblings from male employees, especially about the preferential treatment the program maybe
promoting. The financial budgeting process for 2018 had begun and unless Malhotra and Narain were
able to provide a comprehensive assessment of the campaign, the value added by the initiatives and ways
to improve it, the program would most likely be cut. Malhotra and Narain were reflecting on their efforts
and both were eager to sustain the program. Narain noted,
We really need to get into the depth of this issue. We have less than a month to present our annual
No

budget requirements to senior leadership. It would be a pity if we cannot continue the One Woman
campaign after all the hard work that went into it. After all, it did deliver on reducing attrition and
hiring of more women at entry-level…we have made some great progress but clearly, we are
missing something. Let’s try and get to the bottom of it before One Woman is discarded altogether.

INTENDED COURSES & LEVELS

This case is appropriate for undergraduate human resource management courses and graduate level
Do

courses covering women in leadership, gender, inclusion and diversity, specifically in a global context. At
both levels, we find the case will be valuable in generating discussion on how to assess strategic human
resource initiatives designed to increase gender diversity in senior leadership with respect to the
recruitment, development, and retention of women employees. We have outlined the case questions for
use in both undergraduate and graduate classes, with the expectation that undergraduate students may
require more support from the instructor when analyzing and discussing the case.

Copyright © 2020 by the Case Research Journal and by Grishma Shah, Srinivas R. Pingali and Angela R. Grotto.
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 Beforehand, students should have a broader understanding of leadership and diversity, including gender

t
stereotypes and biases. As such, this case would be most effective if administered during the latter half of

os
a course, after these more general topics have been covered.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
This case can help students evaluate and formulate suggestions for improving human resource initiatives

rP
designed to increase gender equity in leadership in different contexts. The instructor can choose to focus
more on certain learning objectives than others based on course level, course topic, and the instructor’s
preferences. Upon analysis of the case, students will be able to achieve the following learning objectives:
1. Critically evaluate the effectiveness of human resource programs that are designed to promote
gender parity in leadership.
2. Assess the effects of various organizational practices and behaviors that may inhibit women’s
leadership development and advancement.

yo
3. Devise ways for organizations to achieve the goal of gender parity in leadership.

THEORETICAL LINKAGES
Several classic gender diversity theories and models can be used to ground the analysis and discussion of
the case, as all have a similar focus on perceived incongruence or lack of fit between stereotypic
op
characteristics of women and requirements of leadership positions. Also, recent academic research and
popular literature on women “opting out” of the workforce and leadership positions can help explain
whether the leadership pipeline at QGS was “leaky” or “clogged”. Moreover, recent research on the
“maternal wall” provides some evidence of invisible barriers in organizations that prevent gender parity
in leadership. Although the case is focused on gender diversity, the presented theories, models, and
empirical evidence can be extended to understand the barriers that other minority work groups (e.g.,
tC

disabled, racial minorities) may face in their leadership development and advancement.
Social role theory (Eagly 1987) offers an explanation for why it may be difficult for women to reach
senior levels of leadership. Societal gender stereotypes are based on observations of women and men in
certain roles, which may lead to stereotypic assumptions that men and women differ in their innate
characteristics. For example, traditional gender-specific social roles for the division of labor, with men
viewed as breadwinners and women as caretakers/homemakers, may contribute to stereotypes about men
and women’s leadership attributes as well as assumptions for each gender’s ability to carry out that
No

particular social role. For instance, if women are perceived as the primary caretakers and therefore must
deal with family-related issues during the work day, they may also be perceived as unable to hold
demanding leadership positions. These views are especially problematic when held by leaders and
managers of women who are making decisions about their advancement. Indeed, bosses’ perceptions of
family-to-work conflict among their women subordinates have been linked with lower perceptions of
person-organization fit and person-job fit, which were both related to promotability (Hoobler, Wayne, &
Lemmon, 2009).
Moreover, social role theory allows for differentiation across cultural contexts given that women and men
Do

occupy different types of social roles in different cultures (Eagly & Wood, 2012; Wood & Eagly 2002).
Kanter’s (1977) tokenism theory helps explain why the underrepresentation of women in senior
leadership roles creates a barrier to women’s development and promotion to senior leadership positions.
Kanter argued that underrepresented women in senior leadership positions are excluded from
organizational networks, face more scrutiny of their work performance compared to men, and feel that

2
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 they are stereotyped by the majority group (i.e., male leaders). These discriminatory behaviors create a

t
climate of gender leadership inequity, particularly in male-dominated organizations. Subsequently, this

os
inequity may perpetuate gender inequality in the upper-ranks of organizations, as women senior leaders’
success may be thwarted by biases, and women in lower ranks may be less inclined to seek senior leader
positions if they are aware of these biases and obstacles.
According to Heilman’s (1983, 2001) lack of fit theory, women are perceived as not fitting well with the
requirements of managerial jobs, and this perceived gender-related incongruence may be even greater for

rP
the requirements of upper-level management jobs (Lyness & Heilman, 2006). For example, a typical
requirement to reach senior levels in organizations is to take on line (rather than staff) leaderships
positions. However, senior line positions involve directing essential organizational operations or services,
which is more strongly associated with stereotypic male characteristics compared to senior staff (i.e.,
support) positions that provide support and expertise to line managers, which is more congruent with
stereotypic female characteristics. Thus, women are perceived to be a better fit with staff positions than
line positions, thereby creating a barrier to the line positions that are needed to reach senior leadership

yo
levels. Indeed, the requirement of line (vs. staff) leadership experience and insufficient line leadership
experience have been identified as reasons for the underrepresentation of women in senior leadership roles
(Fitzsimmons, Callan, & Paulsen, 2014; Wellington, Kropf, & Gerkovich, 2003).
Ragins and Sundstrum’s (1989) multilevel “path-to-power” model of obstacles to female leadership also
offers an explanation for the low number of women being promoted to senior leadership positions. The
theory posits that a lack of women leader role models as well as negative expectations about women’s
leadership performance make it less likely for women to be promoted to powerful leadership positions.
op
Cheung and Halpern’s (2010) model of leadership development is useful for a discussion of the
facilitators to women’s leadership development and advancement. The model, based on qualitative
research about successful women leaders who incorporate both family and work roles into their lives,
depicts a progression of stages for women to go through to reach senior leadership levels, with critical
facilitators at each stage. For example, personal encouragement is assumed to lead to women’s
development of self-efficacy and motivation to pursue leadership, and this stage includes both
tC

organizational facilitators (e.g., mentors) and personal facilitators (e.g., spouse support) that work together
to support women’s leadership development.
Stone and her colleagues found that second-generation forms of gender bias that were
institutionalized in the inflexible time demands that several types of male-dominated professional
organizations imposed on high-level professionals forced well-educated, professional women to quit their
jobs when they became mothers and were unable to fulfill both the demands of parenting and these
No

inflexible time demands at work (see Lyness & Grotto, 2018; Stone, 2007; Stone & Hernandez, 2013;
Stone & Lovejoy, 2004).
Even if mothers decide to return to the workforce, many face new barriers to leadership advancement.
One barrier for returning mothers has been coined the “maternal wall,” constituting the trade-off
between competence and warmth for working mothers. “Women who have been very successful may
suddenly find their proficiency questioned once they become pregnant, take maternity leave, or adopt
flexible work schedules (Williams, 2004, p. 26). Consequently, working mothers’ performance evaluations
may plummet and their managers may limit development opportunities to them. In addition to these
Do

biases and discriminatory behaviors, a demanding organizational cultures, such as inflexible time
demands, may also interfere with the promotions of mothers (Pryce & Sealy, 2013). These barriers may
push working mothers out of the workforce or discourage their leadership aspirations.
The “labyrinth of leadership” metaphor depicts the obstacles to leadership as twists and turns that
women face on their route to leadership (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Obstacles may include perceptions of
women leaders as lacking authority, power, or legitimacy in comparison to male leaders (Glass & Cook

3
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 2016, Lyness & Thompson, 1997, Muller-Kahle & Schiehll, 2013), unequal leadership development

t
support (e.g., men are more likely to be given advice from their mentors on career advancement and be

os
sponsored for promotions; Diehl & Dzubinski, 2016), stricter standards and biases when evaluating
women’s performance or making promotion decisions at all levels of management (Li, Bagger, &
Cropanzano, 2017; Lyness & Heilman, 2006; Wayne, Lemmon, Hoobler, Cheung, & Wilson, 2017), and
women’s difficulty with finding acceptable leadership styles (Rudman, Moss-Racusin, Phelan, & Nauts,
2012). While providing leadership development support to women through programs, the programs often
fail in recognizing certain barriers. Hence, a scientific and comprehensive evaluation of initiatives

rP
addresses program’s gaps and help achieve the goal of gender parity in leadership (Kossek, Su, & Wu,
2017).
The Barriers and Facilitators to Female Leadership Empowerment (BAFFLE) Model (Lyness &
Grotto, 2018) discusses both barriers and facilitators to women’s leadership development and
advancement. The model offers an explanation for why women’s leadership programs may not be
effective, as it recognizes many organizational complexities that limit the success of such programs. The

yo
model also recognizes the coexistence of organizational barriers and facilitators at multiple levels. There
are unanticipated interactions between barriers and facilitators, such as when organizational female
leadership empowerment initiatives (i.e., facilitators) fail because of hidden, entrenched organizational
barriers. An illustration of the BAFFLE Model can be seen Exhibit IM-1.
Suggested Readings
Human Resource Management (HRM) textbooks with chapters that cover strategic HRM, equal
employment opportunity and diversity, recruiting and selection, retention, career development, and cross-
op
cultural differences can be linked to this case for an analysis and discussion. Additionally, articles covering
gender equity, workplace diversity, or women in leadership are suitable, particularly if the readings take
into consideration global and cross-cultural factors. This following readings are particularly helpful to
students not exposed to gender considerations in earlier course work and remain suggestions for students
and serve as guide for instructors.
tC

As most textbooks in the areas noted above focus on the United States, we highly recommend the
following two resources that address the global context:
• Lyness and Grotto (2018) introduce the “BAFFLE” model, or Barriers and Facilitators of Female
Leader Empowerment. Their review covers many of the theories, models, research discussed
earlier. Although the discussion of the gender leadership gap is focused on the United States, they
include a global perspective, and the model can be universally applied to the culture and country
in question, specifically for an advanced level discussion.
No

Lyness, K. S., & Grotto, A. R. (2018). Women and Leadership in the United States: Are We
Closing the Gender Gap? Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1),
227-265.
• The World Economic Forum report, “The Global Gender Gap Report 2017,” is useful in
comparing gender parity for India (and others) to the rest of the world. Note that India is ranked
108 (out of 144 countries) on the index, which measures progress towards parity between men
and women in four indicators: (1) educational attainment, (2) health and survival, (3) economic
Do

opportunity and (4) political empowerment.

We also recommend additional resources that cover gender diversity in leadership for the country in
which the students are located.
The following popular press articles are also recommended, as each provides a different explanation for
the lack of gender parity in leadership:

4
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 • Belkin, L. (2003, October 26). The opt-out revolution. The New York Times. Retrieved from

t
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/26/magazine/the-opt-out-revolution.html

os
• Warner, J. (2013, August 7). The opt-out generation wants back in. The New York Times.
Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/11/magazine/the-opt-out-generation-
wants-back-in.html
• Perschel, A. (2008). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 86(2), 130-

rP
130.
• Williams, J. C. (2004, October). The maternal wall. Harvard Business Review, 82(10), 26-27
For instructors/students interested in furthering their knowledge of Information Technology and the
Business Process Management (IT-BPM) industry in India, we recommend visiting NASSCOM.in for
up-to-date information. NASSCOM is the leading Information Technology (IT) and Business Process
Management (BPM) industry organization in India and has prolific and up to date resources. At the

yo
NASSCOM website, instructors will also find many resources that discuss the current state of gender
diversity in IT-BPM in India. Some resources available at the NASSCOM website include:
• Women ‘in’equality-not anymore! Gender diversity & inclusivity trends in the IT-BPM sector.
(2016, March). Retrieved from www.nasscom.in/knowledge-center/publications/women-
%E2%80%98%E2%80%99equality-not-anymore-gender-diversity-inclusivity-trends-it
• Raghuram, P., Herman, C., Ruiz-Ben, E., & Sondhi, G. (2017). Women and IT scorecard-India.
op
UK Open University.
• The Economist. (2018, July 5). Why India needs women to work. Retrieved from
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/07/05/why-india-needs-women-to-work

RESEARCH METHODS
tC

This case was written using documents, data and interviews provided directly by QGS senior level
management. In some cases, senior level employees were interviewed for elaboration and/or clarification
of the documents provided. Please note that one of the co-authors is a former executive of the firm.
However, this individual was not directly involved with the One Woman campaign or any other HR related
initiatives at QGS.
No

SUGGESTED TEACHING APPROACHES

Teaching Plan (75 Minute Class)
This teaching plan is designed to focus on deepening students’ understanding of how HR practices are
related to gender diversity in leadership. Specifically, it should help students to evaluate how innovative
HR initiatives can increase and or unconsciously hinder gender diversity in leadership in various firms
and cultural contexts and enable them to further develop thoughtful strategies to increase gender parity
in leadership across different contexts. We find that the case garners a rich dialogue on the multi-level
Do

barriers and facilitators to achieving gender parity at the executive leadership level, taking into
consideration contextual factors both internal (organizational) and external (e.g., societal) to
organizations.
Based on testing of the case at the undergraduate level, we suggest the following plan. While the suggested
plan is designed for a 75-minute class, it can be extended to another class period if the instructor chooses.
For example, in an MBA level course, the instructor may use another class period to address the barriers

5
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 and facilitators to gender parity in executive leadership and the state of gender equity in executive

t
leadership in a specific industry, country, or culture as MBA students tend to bring their own work and

os
cultural experiences into the discussion. Current events may be relevant as well. During the time this case
was written, the #MeToo movement was incessantly in the headlines and, understandably, it is natural
for students or the instructor to relate it back to the case. We do recommend such discussions occur at
the graduate level and/or with more mature students, but of course we leave it to the discretion of the
instructor.

rP
5 Minutes
Introduce QGS and discuss the core issue in the case. Despite a conscious effort, QGS is not able to
increase the number of women in senior leadership.
20 Minutes
Divide the class into groups of four to five members. Give the groups 20 minutes to discuss questions 1
and 2. Question 1 is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of the One Woman campaign. Students should

yo
be able to evaluate the noted exhibits and discuss both the successes and challenges of the program.
Question 2 is aimed at why the shortfalls exist. During our testing of the case, we found the case to be
ripe for discussion of both internal (organizational) and external (societal) barriers.
20 Minutes
Once students have discussed questions 1 and 2, bring the discussion back to the larger group to grasp
their understanding of the issues. We found it helpful to headline three columns on the whiteboard:
op
“Successes” and “Shortfalls” for Question 1 and “Barriers” for Question 2. As the students listed the
outcomes of their discussions, we populated the columns. Our test class came up with the following lists,
which were ripe for discussion.

Successes Shortfalls Barriers

• Overall a good • Such programs • India’s gender roles
tC

program need/take time and expectations

• Created a sense of • Self-reported • Women don’t need to
community among surveys/exit interview work in India (they are
women data not the breadwinners)
• Awareness of the issue • Need broader surveys • Women’s aspirations
went up to see what programs (may be women are
No

• Image of the firm should be initiated not interested in the

went up as it was • No “attract” initiatives positions)
attracting more were implemented • Working hours were
women • No training for men not flexible
• There was salary parity • Men were excluded • Lack of female role
• Budget was small models
• Men’s biases and
beliefs
Do

• No power sharing
If they have missed major points (noted in the discussion question answers), make the students aware of
what they have missed. We found that students were quick to understand the possible societal issues for
the “clogged” pipeline, but not the internal biases that may be perpetuated by HR practices and/or
promoting managers. Students will only be successful in answering questions 3 and 4 only if questions 1

6
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 and 2 are adequately addressed by the discussion, so we recommend that instructor note any missed

t
points and wrap-up with quick takeaways from questions 1 and 2.

os
15 Minutes
Request students to go back to their working groups and address questions 3 and 4. Question 3 is designed
to generate ways to improve the program (now that shortfalls are fully understood). Because the list of
improvements will be long, Question 4 is designed to prioritize improvements and make
recommendations based on the key understanding of barriers elicited in questions 1 and 2.

rP
15 Minutes
Once students are done generating the list of improvements and prioritizing recommendations, bring the
groups back to a larger class discussion. List the improvements on the whiteboard and discuss what to
prioritize and why. Wrap up by noting any points students may have missed. During the testing of the
case, our students came up with the following improvements/recommendations:

yo
• Develop more open dialogue between men and women about the barriers
• Widen the program audience to the entire IT sector
• Educate men
• Include women in power sharing
• Increase the budget for the program
op
• Develop flexible work arrangements
• Prioritize “attract” for not just women, but more open minded men with values that align with
the program
• Develop men’s buy in/develop their values toward the program
tC

• Develop value alignment of current employees

• Involve leadership/develop leadership buy in
• Evaluate employees based on value alignment with the program
• Have lateral hires for leadership positions from other industries
• Institute better change management practices
No

• Give it more time

• Long-term: start early in elementary schools and educate women and men on the sector with
information and skills training, similar to “Girls Who Code”

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. Evaluate the effectiveness (i.e., shortfalls and successes) of the One Woman campaign given its goals,
Do

based on the content in the case and Exhibits 1, 4, and 5. (LO1)

2. What are some barriers that may be inhibiting the success of the One Woman campaign and
“clogging the leadership pipeline”? (LO2)
3. In what ways can the One Woman Campaign be improved to help meet its goals? What actions would
you consider taking to immediately increase the number of senior women managers at QGS? (LO3)

7
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 4. What should Malhotra and Narain recommend to the senior leadership team? Discuss the rationale

t
for your choice. (LO3)

os
SUGGESTED ANSWERS
1. Evaluate the effectiveness (i.e., successes and shortfalls) of the One Woman campaign thus
far given its goals, based on the content in the case and Exhibits 1, 4, and 5. (LO1 and LO2)

rP
Such long-standing historical challenges deep-rooted in cultures around shifting of women to the
workplace take a long time to change despite concerted efforts (see Lyness & Grotto, 2018). Particularly
in India, societal gender stereotypes may create perceptions of men, rather than women, as better fit for
leadership roles, especially senior leadership roles, according to social role theory and lack of fit theory
(Eagly & Wood, 2012; Heilman 1983, 2001, 2012; Wood & Eagly 2002). In India, as well as many other
contexts, if one were to look around to see who is seated at the table in an executive meeting, men would
be more likely observed in senior leadership roles, thereby contributing to the stereotype that men, rather

yo
than women, possess leadership attributes that better equip them than women to hold leadership roles.
Although two years is a short time to fully evaluate the impact of a program that requires changes in
attitudes and behaviors, programs can and should be evaluated periodically to ensure that the initiatives
are on target and the program is projected to achieve its goals. Students may suggest that HR could
determine what the program can realistically achieve during a two-year period to help set expectations for
senior leaders who will be making program decisions.
op
There are two ways to evaluate the successes and shortfalls of the campaign thus far – qualitative measures
(e.g., feedback on the initiatives) and quantitative measures (e.g., gender ratio of new hires, retention
ratios). From a qualitative perspective, the “One Woman Voices” quotes suggest that some of the initiatives
have had a very strong impact. However, based on the metrics noted in Exhibit 6 and Table 2 in the
case, students may argue that the program is not working as well as it should, or perhaps that the available
data is inadequate to draw any firm conclusions, as the goals of the program have not been quantified. It
tC

would be helpful to set specific targets for each goal, specifying what the program can attain during years
one, two, and three. For the attraction goal, QGS could establish the gender ratio of female to male new
hires that they wish to attain each year during a three-year period. For retention, QGS could specify the
percent of women to be retained each year over a three-year period. For the development goal, the target
could be specified as the percent of women QGS aspires to promote each year over a three-year period.
The scientific evaluation of the One Woman campaign based on key metrics would provide clear evidence
of whether the program will achieve its goal of gender parity (Kossek, Su, & Wu, 2017). Even though the
No

program has been in effect for only two years, the specification of metrics would allow program evaluators
to determine whether the program is on track and projected to meet its targets in the future.
Also, if students thoroughly evaluate Exhibits 4 and 5, they should note that across Phase I and II, eight
of the eleven initiatives were aimed at recruitment, not development. Students should understand that
recruitment, development and retention are all interrelated. It is worthy to note the competitiveness of
the market, the shortfall of talent and hence the focus on recruitment. Also, to get women to reach senior
leadership positions, QGS first needed to attract and hire more women and then provide the support and
development needed to develop as leaders.
Do

8
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 Students may also evaluate each of the three strategies.

t
a. Attract:

os
Case Exhibit 4 illustrates that none of the initiatives for attracting women to QGS have been
implemented yet, as the program is only in Phase One. Therefore, the impact of this strategy cannot
be evaluated and the gender ratio for new hires may not have significantly changed. However, Case
Exhibit 1 does suggest that the program has had a positive impact on attraction, as the proportion
of women new hires increased from 16% in 2015 to 27% in 2017. Students may recognize that the

rP
initiatives designed to retain and develop women, although not targeted at attraction, may help create
a positive image of QGS that is noticed by a talent pool of women.
Students can also evaluate whether the Phase Two attract initiatives seem appropriate and viable.
Students may notice that among the four attract initiatives, three initiatives are expected to require a
lot of effort, but only one is expected to have high impact. Moreover, students should note that the
“effort” and “impact” indicators originate from QGS’ internal research team and because we do not

yo
have any more information on what accounts for a high impact versus a low impact effort, it is
difficult to determine the merits of the labels.
Also, as previously mentioned, students might recognize that because QGS did not set any gender
ratio goals for new hires, it is difficult to determine whether the program will meet its attraction goal.
b. Retain:
Exhibit 4 shows that several initiatives in Phase One have been targeted at retaining women at QGS.
op
Students may note that all of the initiatives target women, except for one – the mindset workshops
for managers on the value that women bring to the company – which may also be helpful in attracting
more women to QGS. Although Phase One has focused on retention of women, it may be too soon
to evaluate the impact of these initiatives. However, attrition among women employees did decrease
from 24% in 2014 to 18% in 2017. Yet, as previously mentioned, students might point out that
because QGS did not set any quantifiable goals for the retention of women, it is difficult to determine
tC

whether the drop in attrition meets the retention goal.

Although the exit interview data in Exhibit 6 indicates that women were not leaving QGS due to
dissatisfaction with the organization, some students may be aware that it is self-reported data, and
thus exiting employees may not be fully transparent when reporting why they are leaving QGS.
Research by Stone and colleagues (Stone, 2007; Stone & Hernandez, 2013; Stone & Lovejoy, 2004)
has demystified the myth that most women “opt out” of the workforce to care for their families.
Instead, many women feel pushed out of their organizations because of institutionalized second-
No

generation forms of gender bias. For example, at QGS, and perhaps in the broader BPM industry,
inflexible time demands may be imposed on high-level professionals, making it difficult for women
professionals in India to successfully fulfill the parenting roles that are so highly expected of them,
thereby forcing them to drop out of the workforce.
c. Develop:
A few initiatives in Phase One have been focused on developing women at QGS. The feedback from
women who have participated in these initiatives suggests that the initiatives are having a positive
Do

impact. Students should also note that the program is beginning to show signs of success with more
women in Bands 1, 4 and 5. Yet because promotions typically take two to three years at QGS for
well-performing employees, it may take up to a decade to see an increase in the number of women at
senior leaderships levels (Band 6) in particular. However, given the longer tenure of women in Bands
2 and 3, there may have been women who were ready for promotion during the two-year time period,

9
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 but were overlooked due to bias in the human resource management practices of QGS or because of

t
biased decision-makers.

os
Based on the suggested readings and research conducted by Stone and colleagues on “opting out”,
students may also recognize that the program is not addressing three factors that could influence the
development of women and their promotion to senior roles: 1) HR-related policies and practices that
favor men and hinder women’s advancement, such as inflexible time demands, 2) the biases of
senior/middle leaders who conduct performance evaluations and make the promotion decisions, and

rP
3) other discriminatory behaviors among those in power, such as excluding women from networks,
declining to mentor women, or refusing to share power with women.
Students should understand that although the attraction, retention, and development initiatives may
help to increase the proportion of women in the initial stages of the leadership pipeline, these efforts
may not be sufficient for meaningfully increasing women’s representation in senior leadership
positions (Ibarra et al., 2013). For the development goal in particular, tokenism theory identifies
several barriers that may prevent women who are currently occupying leadership positions from

yo
advancing to higher management levels at QGS (Kanter, 1977). Many of these barriers may stem
from biased perceptions and discriminatory behaviors of the majority group at QGS (e.g., male
leader), such as stereotyping women leaders as warm but not competent, excluding them from
important leadership networks, and scrutinizing their performance in leadership roles. If the One
Woman campaign continues to focus only on the recruitment, retention, and training and development
of women, without also addressing entrenched, systemic gender biases, the program may not succeed
(Lyness & Grotto, 2018). For example, in line with Cheung and Halpern’s (2010) model of leadership
op
development, organizational facilitators (e.g., mentors) and personal facilitators (e.g., spouse and
supervisor support) must work together to support women’s leadership development. Essentially, the
HR policies and practices at QGS as well as the attitudes and behaviors of senior/middle leaders must
be aligned with the program’s objectives in order for the number of women in management roles to
increase.
2. What are some barriers that may be inhibiting the success of the One Woman campaign
tC

and “clogging the leadership pipeline”? (LO3)

We recommend that instructors review the BAFFLE model in Exhibit IM-1, which was developed by
Lyness and Grotto (2018). The model is rich for discussion and although it is too elaborate for one class
discussion, key constructs embedded within the model create a framework for a discussion. In general,
students may realize that although QGS is doing a fairly good job of implementing initiatives that can
facilitate women’s development and advancement to leadership, the effectiveness of the One Woman
No

campaign is probably being diminished by systemic and entrenched organizational barriers to women’s
development and advancement operating at multiple levels at QGS. Barriers and facilitators at multiple
levels of the organization must be simultaneously addressed to ensure the success of a women’s leadership
program. Some examples of barriers and facilitators on which to focus the discussion on are shared below.
Internal barriers include the workplace culture and practices, which are based on the values, beliefs, and
behaviors of individual employees, with the individuals in power (e.g., male leaders) most heavily shaping
an organization’s culture and practices. If these individuals hold biased beliefs about women or women
leaders, then their progress will be hindered, and the goals of the One Woman campaign will not be realized.
Do

Based on the BAFFLE model, students may note that social role theory, lack of fit theory, and tokenism
theory all suggest that the way women, particularly women in leadership positions, are perceived and
treated may not be aligned with the company’s mission of trying to increase the number of women at all
levels of management. Although QGS seems to value its women employees, the goal of creating a
supportive and developmental environment for them may not be fully realized because of conscious and
unconscious biases, such as perceptions of women leaders as lacking legitimacy in comparison to male

10
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 leaders. These biases may operate at all levels of the organization, shaping the values and beliefs of

t
individual male employees as well as members of the senior leadership team. Gender biases may manifest

os
as discriminatory behaviors toward women and behaviors that favor men, such as sponsoring men more
than women for promotions, providing men with more advice on career advancement, or holding women
to higher standards when evaluating their performance or deciding whether to promote them. These
behaviors may be particularly evident among male leaders at QGS.
Kanter’s (1977) tokenism theory explains some of the biases that may affect women who are already in

rP
leadership positions at QGS. More specifically, underrepresented women in senior leadership positions
tend to be excluded from organizational networks, face more scrutiny of their work performance
compared to men, and feel that they are stereotyped by the majority group (i.e., male leaders). These
barriers may impede on the advancement of these women leaders to higher levels of management at
QGS.
Students may suggest that biased beliefs and perceptions of women as well as discriminatory behaviors
toward women at QGS have created a “maternal wall” for mothers who return to work, such that, upon

yo
their return, their proficiency is questioned and, consequently, their performance evaluations plummet
and opportunities for development are withheld by their managers (Williams, 2004). The “maternal wall”
may also be perceived as women’s inability to commit to leadership roles, which in turn could limit her
“path to power.” Ragins and Sundstrum’s (1989) multilevel “path-to-power” model of obstacles to female
leadership posits that a lack of female leader role models as well as negative expectations about women’s
leadership performance make it less likely for women to be promoted to powerful leadership positions.
It is possible that the “maternal wall” is perceived as working mothers not having the ability to travel
op
freely for work, stay late or increase face time. If all of these behaviors are expected at QGS from
leadership, then a mother’s path to power is hindered and discounts her leadership potential. This brings
up another important point which is not directly discussed in the case, but comes up in student
discussions. What type of behaviors are rewarded at QGS – is it face time in the office or results? Who
gets promoted – employees who work traditional schedules and follow traditional career paths, employees
who travel frequently, employees who are available 24/7? What kind of work culture/pressure exists at
tC

QGS? What are the competencies and qualities required to be promoted to a leadership position –
assertiveness or communal behaviors? The BAFFLE model (Lyness & Grotto, 2018) suggests that QGS
leaders need to holistically examine the organization’s programs, policies, and practices to ensure
everything is in sync. In other words, are HR programs and practices (i.e.: face time, shift times and travel
requirements) conducive to the HR initiatives rolled out as part of the One Woman campaign. Are the
work behaviors promoted by One Woman being rewarded or frowned upon by other HR policies?
Students may also recognize that men and male leaders at QGS may hold gender biases that create
No

multiple obstacles for women while on their path to leadership, also known as the “labyrinth of
leadership” (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Perhaps women and women leaders at QGS are perceived as lacking
authority, power, or legitimacy in comparison to men and male leaders (Glass & Cook, 2016; Lyness &
Thompson, 1997; Muller-Kahle & Schiehll, 2013). Because of these biased perceptions, male leaders may
not give women equal leadership development support compared to men (Diehl & Dzubinski, 2016) and
may hold women to stricter standards when their performance is evaluated or promotion decisions are
made (Li et al., 2017; Lyness & Heilman, 2006; Wayne et al., 2017). Thus, although QBS is providing
leadership development support to women through the One Woman campaign, the program may not be
Do

addressing many other barriers, especially those created by men and male leaders at QGS.
Even women themselves may hold unconscious negative perceptions or images of women leaders that
diminishes leadership aspirations and thwarts their progress to leadership. Indeed, interpersonal and
intrapersonal processes are closely connected, with distinctions between them and their effects sometimes
becoming blurred (Hogue & Lord, 2007). In India in particular, women may internalize incongruence
perceptions linking leadership with men and masculine characteristics, and these perceptions could

11
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 undermine women’s perceptions of themselves as leaders. For example, these internalized perceptions

t
may influence the extent to which women have a positive self-image or can identify with leaders. Also,

os
prior experience with discrimination or bias may negatively influence women’s leadership aspirations and
progress. Although the One Woman campaign is focused on women, none of the initiatives seem to directly
address how to dismantle women’s internalized biases of women leaders.
Students may suggest that QGS assess its values and culture and then take steps to shift individual
employee behaviors in favor of an inclusive and supportive work environment where power is shared

rP
between me and women. For these efforts to be successful, QGS will need to position the One Woman
campaign as a business imperative, framing it as campaign for all, not just women. Everyone in the
organization must be able to identify with the campaign and be involved, especially men in the most
powerful positions. Perhaps it would be impactful to educate men in particular on the ramifications if
QGS were to not keep up with competitors in terms of gender diversity.
From an external perspective, both societal and industry context are relevant to the case, as students can
discuss how the values, gender roles and norms of India may influence the effectiveness of the campaign.

yo
For example, in India the societal context is very complex. There are many taboos and social stigmas in
some communities about “working women” that spill over and hinder progress in the workplace. Certain
issues, such as women dropping out of the workplace temporarily or permanently to start/raise a family
are common across the world and exacerbated in India. Moreover, often a working woman in an affluent
household is frowned upon as her working status is perceived as mitigating the high profile of the family
in the larger society. The mentality is very much, “why work when you do not have to” or “she must be
working because the family needs her income”. Industry context is also relevant. For example, the current
op
representation of women overall and women in leadership positions in the BPM industry may influence
the program’s effectiveness. The BAFFLE model identifies such industry factors as barriers to gender
parity in leadership that are external to organizations, but may have a trickle-down effect on women’s
advancement within a particular organization.
Students may argue that QGS does not have any control over the external barriers. Perhaps the best the
organization can do is create a workplace culture that is supportive of women facing these gendered
tC

norms and biases. However, it will take some time to create culture change and see any impact. It is also
important to note that while QGS is putting a lot of effort into the One Woman campaign, it is possibly
moving at a faster pace than society. There is usually some lag between policy and when people begin to
accept the changes. Based on the World Economic 2017 Gender Gap Report, India is one of the few
countries in which women are dropping out of the workforce as compared to previous years. The
suggested Economist reading, “Why India Needs Women to Work,” is ripe with discussion on why Indian
women either do not work or drop out of the workforce.
No

3. In what ways can the One Woman Campaign be improved to help meet its goals? What
actions would you consider taking to immediately increase the number of senior women
managers at QGS? (LO4)
Students can get creative, generate ideas, and discuss the feasibility of each. Additional ideas for discussion
are listed below (refer to Exhibit 3 for more ideas):
Attract Women:
Do

• Market the One Woman program and initiatives as part of recruiting efforts.
• Increase QGS’ social media presence to appeal to women millennials.
• Develop training for recruiters and hiring managers on conscious and unconscious biases
that may influence employee selection decisions.

12
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 • Evaluate current HR policies and practices for hiring to ensure that the criteria for hiring

t
candidates are not biased. Ensuring unbiased decision-making for promotions and

os
consideration of perceptions of merit are also appropriate.
Retain and Develop Women:
• Allow for flexible work/remote work, if possible, and make sure remote work/lack of
FaceTime is not held against them in performance evaluations.

rP
• Send more high-potential junior level women employees to leadership training.
• Evaluate current HR policies and practices for training and development, performance
evaluations, and promotions to assess the role of unconscious bias in these processes. Ensure
equal performance standards for men and women, rewards for both masculine and feminine
leadership styles, the option of un-gendered career paths, work-family support for all
employees, equitable opportunities for development and promotion, and fair and transparent

yo
promotion procedures with criteria for promotion that are based on merit.
• Develop training for all managers on conscious and unconscious biases that may influence
performance evaluations, promotion decisions, and who gets development opportunities.
• Develop policies that require the decision-makers to justify why they have not promoted
women who are ready for promotion. Then identify women who are ready or will be ready
within the next six months for promotion, and track the promotional process, comparing the
op
percent of qualified women who are promoted to the percent of qualified men who are
promoted.
• Implement a fast-track policy for promoting high-potential and/or high-performing
employees. Apply this policy to both men and women to ensure equity.
• To get women into the organization at more senior levels, develop and launch a lateral hire
tC

program as a short-term way to address barriers to higher levels of leadership in QGS. Given
the general scarcity of women in the industry, lateral hires could be made from other
industries. However, this solution does not address the shortage of women in general for
leadership positions. For the most part, this is a larger issue that QGS may not have much
agency over. However, one of the strategies for the second phase of the campaign is to send
teams of volunteer female employees to visit schools and universities in an effort to demystify
study and career opportunities in the ITES industry. Students may recommend that QGS
No

implement this initiative soon as a way to start addressing the scarcity of women in the BPM
industry.
Include Men:
• Although HR has developed a program to help develop women, for the program to be most
effective, it requires the support and involvement of men and those in power at QGS. To
help ensure that men advocate for One Campaign, support women’s leadership aspirations,
and recognize and praise successful women and women leaders, the BAFFLE model suggests
that HR clearly demonstrates the business case for a women’s leadership development
Do

program.
• Make the program more inclusive so it is not positioned as just a women’s initiative, but
instead as a program in which all QGS employees can participate and benefit. For example,
students may suggest that men also serve as mentors in the coaching program, particularly
because there are so few women senior leaders at QGS, as Cheung and Halpern’s (2010)

13
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 model of leadership development suggests. Also, students may suggest that men, especially

t
those in leadership positions who are the gatekeepers to promoting women into senior levels,

os
be educated and coached on how to respond and help when women in the company are
going through life events. Men could also be included in the group conversations to help
break down misconceptions about women and make men more aware of women’s work-life
challenges. This would help change or improve perceptions of working women and women
in leadership.

rP
• Create men-only conversation groups, where possible, in which men can feel safe to share
their perceptions and beliefs about women and female leaders. These groups could also teach
men skills to mentor, develop, and support women (without concern of sexual harassment)
and educate them on unconscious and entrenched biases and stereotypes that may
unknowingly deter or prevent women from advancing.
• Advertise and possibly include men in Bravo and make it available to all QGS employees to
ensure that men read it too. If men are informed of women’s stories, this may help change

yo
their perceptions and beliefs about women and female leaders, creating more powerful and
positive images of women as leaders.
4. What should Malhotra and Narain recommend to the senior leadership team? (LO4)
Students could develop arguments for each decision or pick just one.
Although students may recommend that it is too soon for Malhotra and Narain to decide to end the
op
program, as its impact cannot be fully realized after only two years of implementation, the One Woman
campaign should be evaluated periodically to ensure that progress is being made. Before presenting the
results of their evaluation, Malhotra and Narain should set expectations with senior leaders by explaining
that, despite concerted efforts, it takes time to overcome long-standing historical challenges that are deep-
rooted in the Indian culture around shifting of women to the workplace. They may even want to conduct
research to identify other India-based organizations that have implemented similar programs so that they
tC

can provide the senior leadership team with some benchmarks on how these programs typically progress.
Also, students may discuss that the two to three-year timeframe for promotions makes it nearly impossible
to conclude that the program has not impacted women’s development. Therefore, students may decide
that the program should remain as it is, and that more time needs to be pass. However, because senior
leadership may not be willing to continue investing in the program, students should note that Malhotra
and Narain may need to provide initial qualitative and quantitative evidence that the program is starting
to have an impact. Before gathering quantitative evidence, Malhotra and Narain should set expectations
No

by first establishing realistic targets for each of the program’s goals for the first five years. These targets
would include the gender ratios for new hires, the percent of women retained, the percent of women
promoted, and the gender ratio for promotion that need to be attained each year. Then they could
determine whether the program is meeting the targets each year and if the program is on track to achieve
its goals over a five-year period.
Alternatively, students may recommend that Malhotra and Narain convince senior leadership to reinvest
in the program, as there is a sense of urgency to increase gender diversity in the BPM industry. Although
the program needs more time to have an impact, Malhotra and Narain could recommend a few
Do

incremental changes to the program that would help accelerate its impact, particularly for the goal of
developing women, which may not be on target. However, the changes will require resources, so Malhotra
and Narain will first need to convince the senior leadership that reinvestment in the program is warranted.
This is where Malhotra and Narain could provide some qualitative and quantitative evidence of the
positive impact each area of the program has had so far. Although it may be too soon to draw any
conclusions on the outcome-related data (e.g., gender ratios of new hires, retention ratios), Malhotra and

14
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 Narain could present some qualitative data, such as employee feedback on each of the initiatives, to show

t
how the program is making a positive difference for women at QBS and for the organization itself.

os
Additionally, they could show that the gender ratios and retention rates are increasing year after year.

EPILOGUE
In an effort to give the program more time, QGS continued the One Woman campaign well into 2018. In

rP
late 2018, QGS’s various units were bought out by other firms. Malhotra and Narain left their positions
and started their own human resource development firm, with a keen focus on gender diversity.

REFERENCES
Belkin, L. (2003, October 26). The opt-out revolution. The New York Times. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/26/magazine/the-opt-out-revolution.html

yo
Cheung, F. M., & Halpern, D. F. (2010). Women at the top: Powerful leaders define success as work
and family in a culture of gender. American Psychologist, 65(3), 182-193.
Diehl, A. B., & Dzubinski, L. M. (2016). Making the invisible visible: A cross‐sector analysis of gender‐
based leadership barriers. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 27(2), 181-206.
Eagly, A. H. (2013). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Psychology Press.
op
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Harvard
Business Press.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P.A.M. Van Lange, A.W. Kruglanski, & E.T.
Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories in social psychology (pp. 458–476). Sage.
Fitzsimmons, T. W., Callan, V. J., & Paulsen, N. (2014). Gender disparity in the C-suite: Do male and
tC

female CEOs differ in how they reached the top? The Leadership Quarterly, 25(2), 245-266.
Glass, C., & Cook, A. (2016). Leading at the top: Understanding women's challenges above the glass
ceiling. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 51-63.
Heilman M.E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. In B.M. Staw & L.L. Cummings
(Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 269–298). JAI Press.
Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women's ascent
No

up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 657-674.

Hoobler, J. M., Masterson, C. R., Nkomo, S. M., & Michel, E. J. (2018). The business case for women
leaders: Meta-analysis, research critique, and path forward. Journal of Management, 44(6), 2473-2499.
Kanter R.M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. Basic Books
Kossek, E. E., Su, R., & Wu, L. (2017). “Opting out” or “pushed out”? Integrating perspectives on
women’s career equality for gender inclusion and interventions. Journal of Management, 43(1), 228-254.
Do

Li, A., Bagger, J., & Cropanzano, R. (2017). The impact of stereotypes and supervisor perceptions of
employee work–family conflict on job performance ratings. Human Relations, 70(1), 119-145.
Lyness, K. S., & Grotto, A. R. (2018). Women and leadership in the United States: Are we closing the
gender gap? Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 227-265.

15
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental: performance evaluations and

t
promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 777-785.

os
Lyness, K. S., & Thompson, D. E. (1997). Above the glass ceiling? A comparison of matched samples
of female and male executives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 359.
Muller-Kahle, M. I., & Schiehll, E. (2013). Gaining the ultimate power edge: Women in the dual role of
CEO and Chair. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(5), 666-679.

rP
Perschel, A. (2008). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 86(2), 130-130.
Pryce, P., & Sealy, R. (2013). Promoting women to MD in investment banking: multi-level influences.
Gender in Management: An International Journal, 28, 448–67
Raghuram, P., Herman, C., Ruiz-Ben, E., & Sondhi, G. (2017). Women and IT scorecard-India. UK Open
University.
Ragins, B. R., & Sundstrom, E. (1989). Gender and power in organizations: A longitudinal perspective.

yo
Psychological Bulletin, 105(1), 51-88.
Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash
effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 165-179.
Stone P. (2007). Opting out? Why women really quit careers and head home. University of California Press.
Stone, P., & Hernandez, L. A. (2013). The all‐or‐nothing workplace: flexibility stigma and “opting out”
op
among professional‐managerial women. Journal of Social Issues, 69(2), 235-256.
Stone, P., & Lovejoy, M. (2004). Fast-track women and the “choice” to stay home. The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 596(1), 62-83.
The Economist. (2018, July 5). Why India needs women to work. Retrieved from
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/07/05/why-india-needs-women-to-work
tC

Warner, J. (2013, August 7). The opt-out generation wants back in. The New York Times. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/11/magazine/the-opt-out-generation-wants-back-in.html
Wayne, S. J., Lemmon, G., Hoobler, J. M., Cheung, G. W., & Wilson, M. S. (2017). The ripple effect: A
spillover model of the detrimental impact of work–family conflict on job success. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 38(6), 876-894.
No

Wellington, S., Kropf, M. B., & Gerkovich, P. R. (2003). What's holding women back? Harvard Business
Review, 81(6), 18-18.
Williams, J. C. (2004, October). The maternal wall. Harvard Business Review, 82(10), 26-27.
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men:
Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 699–727.
Women ‘in’equality-not anymore! Gender diversity & inclusivity trends in the IT-BPM sector. (2016,
March). Retrieved from www.nasscom.in/knowledge-center/publications/women-
%E2%80%98%E2%80%99equality-not-anymore-gender-diversity-inclusivity-trends-it
Do

16
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.
 Exhibit IM-1: The BAFFLE Female Leadership Model: A Multilevel Organizational Model of the

t
Barriers And Facilitators of Female Leader Empowerment

os
rP
yo
op
tC
No

Source: Lyness, K. S., & Grotto, A. R. (2018). Women and Leadership in the United States: Are We
Closing the Gender Gap? Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 227-
265.
Do

17
This Teaching Note is authorized for use only by Dr.S.Anjali Daisy, Bharathidasan University until Aug 2024. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu
or 617.783.7860.