Dear women on corporate boards, more prestige means less power

What you need to know:

• Women are gaining prestigious corporate board positions, but men continue to reap greater career rewards from board membership.
• Boardroom parity is increasing, but equal representation alone does not guarantee equal access to influence and decision-making power.

Women have made big strides in terms of being represented on corporate boards, both in terms of numbers and the prestige of their positions. But this prestige—and the greater visibility it brings—is not necessarily helping women advance. It might even be an obstacle in the long run.

A recent study examined an aspect of boardrooms that’s having an unexpected impact on women’s leadership. The study surveyed a sample of female and male board members at the 100 largest companies listed on the London Stock Exchange. The researchers wanted to determine whether the prestige associated with certain organisations actually translates into additional career opportunities for women.

What they found was that while more women are being newly appointed to the boards of leading companies—largely as a result of pressure related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies—men secure more new board seats as a result of their existing board membership.

The study also revealed that the initial advantage women enjoy fades over time and, paradoxically, may decline with additional appointments. This dynamic reveals an important asymmetry: for men, prestige acts as a career accelerator, while for women it’s less likely to translate into lasting opportunities.

The double-edged sword of visibility

The researchers offer the following explanations:

Women who obtain board positions are more highly scrutinised by the public, shareholders and the media compared to their male colleagues, which means that even the slightest misstep can be detrimental to them. A 2024 report entitled “Time to Tell a Different Story: Analysing Societal and Media Representation of CEOs” by the strategy consulting firm Russell Reynolds Associates clearly illustrated this phenomenon.

The heightened visibility of women can increase the risk that any serious problem faced by these organisations will be disproportionately attributed to them, and that their personal reputations will be more severely impacted.

Organisations often assign women—even informally—additional responsibilities, such as representation, mentoring and diversity initiatives. This heavier workload could make them hesitate before accepting new board positions in the future.

Added to all this is the informal burden of serving as a role model—another dimension rarely recognised or valued in formal career advancement mechanisms. The hypervisibility of women on boards of directors does not just bring increased representation: it comes with higher expectations and less tolerance for error.

Prestige, power and gender stereotypes

Several other studies that examine power in relation to gender stereotypes offer other interesting explanations. For example, the authors of a study examining perceptions of the people identified by Forbes magazine as the most powerful in the world found that men’s power is more closely associated with roles involving action, control, and authority.

Women’s power, in contrast, is more closely associated with status—in other words, the social recognition and symbolic value others attributed to them. The distinction is fundamental, because status and prestige—which depend on social perceptions and leave one more exposed to judgment—are easier to lose than power. Status is inherently more unstable and dependent on social judgments, whereas power relies more on formal and institutional mechanisms.

As a result, people perceived as having high status are subject to stricter behavioural expectations, particularly when it comes to fairness, interpersonal warmth and perspective taking. On corporate boards, women, therefore, are valued symbolically, but do not have the same access to the concrete levers of influence and decision-making as men do.

From the glass ceiling to the glass bubble

The results of a recent study on women’s representation on corporate boards and in senior leadership positions at Canadian companies show that there has been a loss of momentum in the percentage of women acquiring these roles. This slowdown suggests that mechanisms for entry have progressed more rapidly than those that ensure sustainable and equitable career advancement.

Furthermore, it appears that American DEI guidelines have led several Canadian companies that do business, or are listed in the United States, to relax their diversity policies. This raises a crucial question: How can we ensure that women who join boards of directors subsequently have the same opportunities for appointments as men? How can we prevent them from being confined to a “glass bubble,” where their advancement and influence remain limited despite their initial success?

Québec’s guidelines on gender parity targets for Québec-owned corporations clearly demonstrate that more and more women are securing board positions and that they remain in those roles despite the challenges just outlined.

So, from 2023 to 2025, the percentage of women appointed to Québec public corporations was 51.9 per cent in 2023, 52.5 per cent in 2024 and 53.6 per cent in 2025. These results show that parity is achievable, but it does not, on its own, guarantee true equality when it comes to influence and access to power.

Towards a more systemic approach

Since the quota approach has little chance of success in the Canadian context of private companies, the negative effects that some female board members may experience must be addressed differently. Women require a more systemic approach—one that is not limited to mere representation, but also focuses on the quality and impact of their representation.

In our view, the concept of gender-balanced governance—as well as its financial and non-financial impacts—needs to be more fully disclosed to shareholders, investors, and the media. Another study offers valuable insights into how the presence of women on boards of directors enhances board dynamics.

The real issue, therefore, goes beyond access to positions: for women, prestigious board appointments are not translating in an equitable way into power, influence and opportunities. This gap between symbolic praise and actual decision-making power is a key reason inequality persists. Achieving equal gender representation is not enough; it must actively shift real power within organisations.

Louise Champoux-Paillé is Cadre en exercice at John Molson School of Business, Concordia University, while Anne-Marie Croteau is the Dean of John Molson School of Business, Concordia University.