Picture this: you struggle for years to get a foot in a company when they consistently claim a need for "more women in leadership." Then, when you do manage to get your foot in the door, your perspectives are considered "too emotional," your worries misinterpreted as misunderstandings, and your abilities called into question. But then, finally, you get a promotion—not because of your skill but because their department is failing and no one else wants it. Welcome to Gaslight, Gatekeep, Glass Cliff.

"Gaslight, gatekeep, glass cliff" has emerged not only in online parlance but has also come to symbolize a very important way of thinking about how women and minority groups are treated, and describes a cycle that starts with entry barriers and ends in precarious positions of power where everything appears to be leading up to success but is actually a recipe for failure. To a large degree, this cycle points towards the difficulty in describing in a tangible way in which people are being discriminated against when it appears in no way in organizational policies but in fact in organizational culture. In a setting where opportunities are supposed to be equalized without discrimination, women and minority groups may find it difficult to gain access to an elite network, a high-profile project, or a decision-making room based on a dubious standard such as ‘culture fit.’ While a culture fit sounds innocuous, in reality, this informal standard can lock in a power structure in an organization where leaders appear very much like each other.

But even after someone overcomes these kinds of barriers and gains a professional role, they will likely find that they have begun the second stage of this process—the gaslighting stage. Gaslighting, a term borrowed from the field of psychology, describes a set of practices used to make people question their own perceptions and experiences. It might take the form of playing down a fear of bias, telling someone they are simply under too much "stress" or experiencing an "emotional response," or simply telling them they are not yet ready or resilient enough. This is not necessarily an aggressive action per se; in fact, many times it will be presented in a positive way to "thicken skin" or "stay positive." Behind these words, however, lies a further undermining of legitimate fears of discrimination and a shifting of the burden of proof to these affected individuals. The two decades of research in social sciences have uncovered trends that relate to this experience. One of them is ‘the Glass Cliff’ in organizational psychology, first described in 2005 by Michelle K. Ryan and S. Alexander Haslam of Britain. They noted a trend in which women were more frequently considered for leading a firm in ‘challenging circumstances’ or in a ‘dormant state’ when ‘resources may be constrained.’ In other words, when a firm is struggling, a woman is more likely to be called to head it. They conducted a research study of FTSE 100 companies and discovered a pattern in which companies with a female director performed badly before she took up her role. ‘This can be thought of as a “glass cliff,” where a leader is poised precariously on a cliff face, in full view but with a very short fall into oblivion.’

The problem with the glass cliff is that it is presented as a step forward. A woman or a minority-led organization can be praised for "shattering the glass ceiling," but they can be placed in a situation where they face such challenging circumstances that it is more likely they will fail. They can be fired, and they can be faulted rather than credited because they were part of a progressive organization in the first place. Examples such as these shows the ways in which these elements seem to work in practical contexts rather than in a purely academic capacity.

Perhaps one of the most famous examples of this concerns a former CEO of BP, where a woman with a very good set of qualifications was chosen in the wake of a major oil spill event; she ended up with a major organization that suffered from very deep-seated financial ailments, which led to a tenure plagued with financial difficulties.

Such gatekeeping, gaslighting, and glass cliff appointments are not gendered phenomena in particular but affect a disproportionately high percentage of women. Often, minority group leaders are affected in a similar manner. A leadership position in a marginalized racial/ethnic group might see a denial to join informal social circles that facilitate fast-track progression in an organization (gatekeeping), complaints of a biased work environment being ignored or interpreted as a personal matter (gaslighting), and subsequent appointments to a highly visible but very challenging leadership role during a time of crisis in an organization (glass cliff).

The consequences of such a cycle are wide-ranging. For an individual, the effects of such validation can cause burnout at work, which leads to a lack of satisfaction in work and a complete departure from organizations. For an organization, it leads to a loss of the benefits of inclusive leadership in problem-solving and innovation in an organization. A study conducted in 2020 by McKinsey indicated that a higher level of gender and ethnic diversity leads to a higher chance of companies outperforming their counterparts on a median level of profitability. Although there has been a boost in numbers in many sectors pertaining to entry-level positions, leadership positions have a stubborn level of poor diversity because a problem such as gaslighting in an organization is less recognized in contrast to gatekeeping and glass ceilings.

To address this systemic life cycle, a combination of structural and cultural shifts is a requirement. To address this structurally, organizations need to assess recruitment, progression, and performance practices with a focus on removing obstacles and establishing objective principles for progression. Some cultural shifts in the workspace include establishing a culture where bias and discrimination conversations are fluid, where complaints are not invalidated in favor of being emotional.

In essence, it is important to conclude with Gaslight, Gatekeep, and Glass Cliff because it underlines how important it is to focus not on superficial signs of progress being made but to look beyond them. Having representation is important, but a superficial attempt at creating a better future will not achieve this goal; rather, it will make a joke of it by offering a buzzword but not a reality. To achieve a reality and not a buzzword, gaslighting, gatekeeping, and the glass cliff provide ways to break these traditional systems.

Sources:

• Sabatini, A. M. (2024). Gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss: Succession support for daughters in the family business. Family Court Review, 63(1), 202-216. https://doi.org

.    .    .