It’s not a pipeline problem, it’s a pattern problem

Why companies “can’t find” women for C-level roles; and why that says more about their search than the market.

Every recruiter has heard it: “We’d love to hire more women in leadership, but there just aren’t that many at this level.”

It’s said with the same weary sigh every time as if it’s gravity, not a choice.

The truth is simpler, and far less flattering: it’s not that the women aren’t there. It’s that we’re still looking for them in the same old places, through the same narrow lens, and measuring them by a definition of leadership built for someone else.

The myth of the missing women

The numbers don’t lie, they just get ignored.Women make up almost half of the global workforce, and over 40% of managers. Yet only about one in four C-suite roles is held by a woman (McKinsey, 2024).

So the talent is there, it just doesn’t make it to the table.

When companies talk about the “pipeline problem,” what they often mean is that the people they already know, or the ones who’ve followed a very specific career pattern, all look the same. That’s not a pipeline issue. That’s a pattern issue.

The search image hasn’t changed

When organizations hire at executive level, they tend to look for proven

experience.That usually translates to:

• someone who’s already held a similar C-level title,

• in the same industry,

• with 15+ years in a linear career path,

• and, quite often, someone who’s part of the same professional network.

On paper, that sounds logical. In practice, it’s self-replication.If your leadership team is 80% male, and you define “qualified” as “looks like the last five hires,” you’ll get exactly that.

The “search image”, that internal picture of what a great leader looks like, hasn’t evolved in decades. It’s still shaped by traits we subconsciously associate with traditional authority: assertiveness, confidence, decisiveness. When those same qualities show up in women, they’re often read as abrasive or unlikable. Meanwhile, collaborative or empathetic leadership styles, which research consistently links to stronger team performance, are undervalued because they don’t fit the familiar mold.

So when we say “we just didn’t find the right woman for the role,” what we often mean is, “we found women who didn’t fit our picture of leadership.”

“We’re looking for someone who’s done this exact job before” sounds safe, but it’s also how you guarantee nothing ever changes.

The risk fallacy

Executive hiring is often treated as risk management. The goal is to avoid mistakes, not to find vision. But “minimizing risk” almost always means “sticking to what we know.”

That’s why many companies keep hiring from the same circles; because familiarity feels safe. But in leadership, familiarity is the opposite of innovation.

And the data backs it up:According to McKinsey’s Diversity Wins report, companies in the top quartile for gender diversity at executive level are 25% more likely to outperform financially.That’s not correlation, it’s competence.

So what’s riskier: challenging the pattern, or protecting it until your competitors outgrow you?

The glass cliff, revisited

In a previous Open Track article, we looked at the glass cliff, the phenomenon where women are finally given leadership opportunities, but often in moments of crisis or decline, when the likelihood of failure is highest.

It’s the illusion of progress: women finally make it to the top, but only when the ship is already sinking.

This connects directly to the “pattern problem.”Because when companies only see women as suitable leaders once the old approach has failed, they’re still treating female leadership as the alternative, not the standard.It’s not enough to open the door after the damage is done, we need to redefine what leadership looks like before the crisis hits.

If you want different results, change the lens

If your company keeps saying it can’t find women for senior roles, it’s time to look at how you’re defining “qualified.”

That means:

• Expanding the search criteria. Value leadership potential, not just job titles.

• Diversifying where you look. Move beyond traditional headhunting pools and legacy networks.

• Challenging the narrative. Non-linear careers are not red flags, they’re often signs of breadth, adaptability, and perspective.

• Sharing accountability. DEI goals can’t live solely in HR. They belong in the boardroom, with executive-level ownership.

You can’t claim you value diversity if you only look for it through the same old lens.

The mirror test

When leaders say they “can’t find” qualified women, they’re really saying:

“We don’t know how to look differently.”

The talent exists. The experience exists. The leadership exists.But you won’t find it if you keep searching for a mirror of what has always “worked.”

Real progress starts when companies stop waiting for women to fit the mold and start reshaping the mold itself.

Because it was never a pipeline problem, it was always a pattern problem.