The Confidence Trap: How Companies Misjudge Talent—and Lose Their Best Leaders

A Systemic Blindspot in Corporate Ladders

Companies are perpetuating a flawed system that rewards 'vibes' over results, hindering the promotion of top talent. Research reveals that women consistently outperform men in their current roles yet receive lower ratings for "potential," which ultimately leads to them being overlooked for advancement.

The issue lies not with women's confidence but rather with companies confusing potential with competence. Factors like "executive presence" and "gravitas" carry significant weight, masking bias and rewarding self-promotion over substance. Calibration meetings designed to standardize ratings can actually amplify this dynamic, as confident storytelling often trumps comparable results.

This 'broken rung' gap between men's and women's promotion rates not only limits careers but also affects competitiveness. A study analyzing promotion data from nearly 30,000 employees found that women labeled as having less potential went on to outperform male colleagues with identical ratings.

Moreover, the problem compounds in how feedback is delivered. Women's performance reviews disproportionately focus on personality traits and labels, such as "abrasive" or "too nice," rather than business impact. Men's reviews, by contrast, center on business outcomes and technical skills. This creates a vicious cycle where women must prove what they have already done to advance.

The solution lies in evidence-based advancement practices, which prioritize measurable competencies over intuition. Companies can fix the problem by defining potential concretely, auditing ratings that gate opportunity, replacing confidence tests with readiness trials, banning trait-only feedback in calibration, reframing the opportunity itself, and monitoring language.

By implementing these changes, companies can build deeper leadership benches, reduce flameouts among newly promoted managers, and shorten time-to-impact on critical work. It's not about coaching women to project more confidence but rather about stopping the systemic bias that mislabels high performers as lower potential. The fix is simple: raising the evidentiary bar for everyone.

As a business leader, it's crucial to acknowledge this blindspot and act on the data. By doing so, companies can create a fairer and more effective promotion system that rewards results-driven leaders rather than those who excel at projecting confidence.

I'm so down with this article - companies need to stop playing games with 'vibes' and actually measure performance. It's not about fixing women's confidence, it's about recognizing when a person is actually crushing it in their role . Calibration meetings are just a cover for bias, and feedback that focuses on personality traits rather than business outcomes is so outdated .

I've seen this play out with colleagues who get snubbed for promotions because they're not the 'executive presence' type . But I've also seen women rise to leadership positions with impressive results - they just need a fair shot at getting there . It's time for companies to get serious about creating a promotion system that rewards actual competence, not just who can tell a good story or put on a convincing smile .

think its crazy how ppl get passed over cuz of vibes but still smash it in their roles lol i mean what even is "gravitas" anyway? research shows womens outperfom men all the time yet get lower ratings for potencial sounds like companies r more worried about how u look and sound than actually getting the job done

i feel like these calibration meetings r just a way to justify biased ratings and if ur too confident u win lol sorry not sorry but seriously tho this gotta change ppl need to focus on whats really important results over vibes

I am literally still fuming about this ! I mean, come on, how many times do we need to reiterate the same thing? Companies are so clueless, prioritizing 'vibes' over actual results. It's like they're trying to hold talented women back just because they can't fit into some arbitrary mold of "executive presence" . And don't even get me started on how this perpetuates bias, like it's just okay to label someone as having less potential just because they're a woman or have a certain personality trait . It's time for companies to stop relying on intuition and start using data-driven decision making. If you can't measure it, don't promote it! It's not about coaching women to be more confident, it's about recognizing and addressing the systemic issues that are holding them back . And let's talk about how this affects the entire company, from reduced competitiveness to flameouts among newly promoted managers . It's a classic case of short-sightedness, but I'm glad to see some business leaders taking notice and calling out for change .

This is crazy! Companies are still perpetuating these outdated biases like they're going out of style . Like, what's wrong with just promoting the most capable person? It's not about vibes or gravitas, it's about actual skills and results . And don't even get me started on how women have to "prove" themselves all over again in every review. It's exhausting . Can we please just get rid of these subjective ratings already?! Companies need to focus on what really matters: getting the job done .

And I love the part about labeling things as "trait-only feedback". Like, come on! That's not a thing. We should be focusing on actual performance metrics, not just making assumptions based on personality traits . It's time for companies to get with the times and start valuing results over reputations. My daughter would totally kill it at her job if she had this kind of system in place .

The thing is, I've seen this play out in my own workplace . It's like, you get this one guy who's always smiling and talking a good game, but he's really struggling to meet his targets. Meanwhile, there's this woman on our team who's quietly crushing it, but she's always getting overlooked for promotions because of her "personality". I mean, what even is that? It's like we're more focused on how well she can schmooze rather than whether or not she's actually delivering results. And don't even get me started on those calibration meetings – it feels like a joke, just going through the motions to make sure everyone looks good on paper . The problem is, we're all in this together, and if we don't address this blind spot, we'll never create a truly level playing field.

I'm really frustrated by how some companies still perpetuate this outdated concept of "executive presence." It's ridiculous to think that someone's ability to "gravitas" is a direct measure of their competence. I've seen so many women in my network get passed over for promotions because they don't check the right boxes on the corporate ladder .

It's time for companies to focus on actual results and measurable competencies, rather than relying on subjective traits like "potential" or "executive presence." We need to hold our leaders accountable for more than just projecting confidence – we need concrete evidence of their ability to deliver. It's not about fixing women, it's about fixing the system .

I also think it's interesting how feedback is delivered differently depending on your gender. I've had friends who've received "abrasive" labels in their performance reviews, while men have gotten away with being simply "direct." It's like companies are trying to box women into these narrow, personality-based criteria rather than seeing them as individuals with unique strengths and weaknesses .

Overall, this is a huge blindspot that we need to address ASAP. By implementing more evidence-based advancement practices, companies can create a fairer and more effective promotion system that rewards results-driven leaders, not just those who excel at projecting confidence .

omg i feel like this is such a obvious blindspot in corporate culture we've been saying for ages that it's all about "who you know" vs "what you can do" and now the research proves it like seriously how many times have women been told they need to work on their "executive presence" when really they just need a raise or more resources? its all about treating people fairly and giving them credit for what they actually accomplish

I mean come on, 30k employees is a decent sample size! You'd think they'd have some solid stats by now . Companies need to stop playing around with "vibes" and "gravitas" - it's just a fancy way of saying "who's got the best personality?" . They should be focusing on actual performance and skills, not trying to predict who's gonna be a good fit based on a 30-second meeting . And what's with these calibration meetings? Sounds like a total waste of time... just use data-driven metrics already!

Companies need to step up their game when it comes to promoting top talent. Women are killing it in their current roles but still get passed over for advancement due to biases like "executive presence" and "gravitas". It's not about women being less confident, it's about the fact that companies value vibes over actual results. And let's be real, calibration meetings can actually make things worse by rewarding those who are good at self-promotion.

The study on promotion data was pretty eye-opening - women labeled as having less potential went on to outperform their male colleagues with identical ratings. It's crazy to think that companies are still perpetuating this flawed system.

I'm all for evidence-based advancement practices, but it's not just about raising the evidentiary bar for everyone... I mean, how can we expect women to be taken seriously if they're being judged on traits like "abrasive" or "too nice"? It's time for companies to get real and start valuing actual business impact over personality traits.

I've got a friend who works in marketing and she's always telling me how annoying it is to get feedback on her "executive presence" during reviews lol like what even is that but seriously, this systemic blindspot is wild. Companies need to realize that just because someone is confident doesn't mean they're not a rockstar at their job. And yeah, let's be real, women are way more likely to get labeled as "too nice" or "abrasive" and it's like they can't win either way . The solution isn't about fixing the woman, it's about fixing the system so everyone gets a fair shot. I'm low-key hoping my friend gets promoted soon because she's killing it in her role

Companies need to step up their game . This systemic blindspot is ridiculous - women are crushing it in their roles yet getting passed over for promotions because of 'vibes' instead of actual results . It's not about women being less confident, it's about companies assuming everyone has 'executive presence'... newsflash: that's a load of BS . We need to focus on competence over potential and make sure feedback is fair and based on facts. No more personality traits or labels - let's talk business outcomes and skills . Companies can do better, and they should start by acknowledging this problem and making real changes .

OMG, THIS IS SO FRUSTRATING!!! corporations need to stop messing with their women employees and start valuing their actual skills and accomplishments over "vibes" and "gravitas". it's like they think having high heels and a strong voice is enough to get ahead in the workplace . newsflash: IT'S NOT! we need more concrete metrics for advancement and less personality tests that are rigged against women . it's time for companies to step up their game and create a fairer promotion system that rewards results over just being likable .

companies need to stop playing games with 'vibes' and start valuing actual achievements women are outperforming men in their roles but getting snubbed for promotions because of superficial traits like "executive presence" and "gravitas" it's time for evidence-based advancement practices that prioritize measurable competencies over intuition by acknowledging this blindspot and making concrete changes, companies can create a more level playing field and foster deeper leadership benches

I'm really frustrated when I see guys getting promoted just because they're good speakers , but their actual work is meh. Meanwhile, women are being held back because of biases and stuff like "being too nice" . It's not about women needing to be more confident or anything like that. Companies need to start valuing results over vibes . They should be focusing on what actually gets the job done, rather than who can sell themselves better . And honestly, it's so annoying when they talk about "executive presence" and all that jazz... it's just code for "I'm a guy and I'm in charge" . We need to get rid of this blind spot and start promoting people based on their actual skills and accomplishments .

I mean, come on... 30k employees is like, a lot of people to overlook just because of how they present themselves? We gotta stop judging people based on vibes and start looking at actual numbers. It's crazy that women are being held back by companies who think "gravitas" is more important than actually doing the job right. I'm all for confidence, but let's not confuse it with competence! Companies need to get their act together and stop playing favorites. This isn't about coaching women to be more confident, it's about fixing a broken system that's been holding them back for far too long. Let's just focus on results-driven leaders, you know?

You know, when you think about it, corporate ladders aren't all that different from our own personal journeys of growth and self-discovery... We're constantly being assessed, evaluated, and judged on how we present ourselves to the world. The problem is, this can lead to a focus on "executive presence" over actual accomplishments. It's like, what if we were all just playing dress-up, trying to impress others rather than genuinely showcasing our skills? And then there's the language we use to describe each other... "abrasive" vs "confidence." Which one is more important: can't we focus on results instead of personalities? It makes me wonder, what if we turned our companies' promotion systems into a mirror for our own self-reflection?

omg i totally get why women are getting passed over for promotions its all about the vibes vs actual skills & results i mean how many times have u seen that girl who's always like super nice but can't even finish a project on time? and meanwhile there's this guy who's all like "yeah im gonna crush it" but actually hes just winging it the whole time lol

anyway back to this article i feel like companies need to get real about how they evaluate people for promotions its all so subjective i mean who determines what makes someone have "executive presence" or "gravitas"? and those calibration meetings sound super sketchy like theyre just a way to justify the status quo

idk man but if companies can just start valuing results over personality traits we might actually see some real progress