Who gets encouraged to become a manager, and who gets encouraged to keep doing a good job where they are?

That question sits at the heart of the glass escalator. For employers, it offers a reason to examine how people gain access to advancement, even in professions where women make up the majority.

What Does “Glass Escalator” Mean?

The glass escalator describes informal advantages that can help some men move into higher-status positions in occupations predominantly staffed by women.

Sociologist Christine L. Williams introduced the concept in 1992. Her study drew on interviews conducted between 1985 and 1991 with 99 men and women in nursing, elementary school teaching, librarianship, and social work across four U.S. metropolitan areas (Williams, 1992).

It is a way to examine workplace patterns, not a claim that every man advances faster or that any individual promotion is undeserved.

How Can the Glass Escalator Work?

Williams (1992) described men receiving encouragement to pursue administrative or supervisory work, sometimes even when they preferred to remain in their existing specialties. Informal relationships with supervisors could also support their careers.

The concern for employers is how leadership potential gets recognized. Does a manager recommend someone because of demonstrated skills, or because that person fits an unexamined image of a leader?

Consider this hypothetical example: Two employees have comparable performance and experience. One receives repeated invitations to lead projects, while the other receives praise but little developmental support. Before their next promotion review, they have already had different opportunities to build leadership experience.

That difference deserves examination without assuming why it happened.

Does It Affect All Men Equally?

No. Race and workplace context complicate the picture.

Wingfield’s (2009) research on Black men in nursing found that the upward mobility associated with the glass escalator was not uniformly available to all men. The study challenged the idea that gender alone explains access to these advantages.

Williams (2013) also revisited her original concept, arguing that it did not adequately account for race, sexuality, class, or changes in how work is organized. Its assumptions about stable jobs and established career ladders limited its usefulness.

More recent research reinforces the importance of context. Using German employer-employee data from 2012–2019, Kronberg et al. (2024) found that women’s promotion disadvantages in women-dominated jobs were most pronounced in establishments where men formed the overall workforce majority. Those disadvantages weakened in establishments employing more women.

These findings do not establish how common the pattern is in U.S. workplaces today. They do show why a profession’s gender makeup alone cannot explain promotion opportunities.

What Can Employers Do to Support Fair Advancement?

The practical question is whether employees have fair access to the experiences and consideration required for promotion. Here are four starting points for reviewing your process:

• Define promotion criteria before evaluating candidates. Identify the skills, responsibilities, and evidence required for the role. Ask reviewers to support judgments about leadership potential with specific examples.

• Make development opportunities visible. Explain how employees can express interest in training, acting leadership roles, and projects that build relevant experience.

• Ask employees about their goals. Use consistent career conversations rather than assumptions about who wants management responsibilities or who prefers specialist work.

• Review who gets considered. Examine how employees enter promotion shortlists and receive developmental assignments. Where access differs, investigate the process and relevant job factors before drawing conclusions.

These are practical process suggestions, not interventions proven by the cited studies to eliminate the glass escalator.

Final Thoughts

The glass escalator raises a useful question for fair opportunity: Who receives the encouragement, experience, and consideration needed to advance?

For employers building a broader talent pool, recruitment is one part of the work. Clear advancement standards give employees a way to understand what comes next and how to prepare for it.

For employers: Connect with candidates from a broader talent pool through Diversity.com.

For job seekers: Explore job opportunities on Diversity.com and ask prospective employers how they make development and promotion opportunities available.

Get Started with Diversity.com

At Diversity.com, we connect employers with qualified candidates through inclusive hiring, and help job seekers find employers committed to it.

For Employers & HR Professionals:

✔ Post a job and reach candidates across healthcare, higher education, government, nonprofits, and private industry
✔ Browse our resources for guides, checklists, and reports on inclusive hiring
✔ Join our community in LinkedIn for hiring and compliance updates

For Job Seekers:

✔ Find Inclusive Jobs at organizations that chose to post here
✔ Create a free account to apply and get matched to new openings
✔ Browse our resources for career guides and tools

Have questions? Reach out to our team. We're here to support you.

Related Articles

• What Is the Glass Cliff? How It Can Affect Underrepresented Leaders

• What Is the Broken Rung? How First Promotions Shape Women’s Careers

• Flexibility Stigma at Work: When Flexible Work Carries a Career Penalty

• What Is the Bamboo Ceiling? Barriers to Asian American Advancement

• The Halo Effect in Hiring: How First Impressions Distort Candidate Evaluation

• Who Gets the Office Housework? How Non-Promotable Tasks Affect Career Equity

• Name Bias in Hiring: What Resume Studies Actually Show

• Fair Chance Hiring: What Employers Should Know About Criminal Records

• The Motherhood Penalty at Work: What Research Actually Shows

Sources & References

• Kronberg, A.-K., Gerlach, A., & Gangl, M. (2024). Promoting men and women to management: Putting the glass escalator paradox in the establishment context. Social Science Research, 120, Article 103003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2024.103003

• Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for men in the “female” professions. Social Problems, 39(3), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.2307/3096961

• Williams, C. L. (2013). The glass escalator, revisited: Gender inequality in neoliberal times, SWS feminist lecturer. Gender & Society, 27(5), 609–629. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243213490232

• Wingfield, A. H. (2009). Racializing the glass escalator: Reconsidering men’s experiences with women’s work. Gender & Society, 23(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243208323054