Whose Ladder Do We Climb?

"23-year-old James is a technical whiz, delivering flawless code in solitude. His peer Jasmine is slower to master code, but mentors colleagues, helps new hires settle in, and diffuses team tensions before they escalate. Young James is quickly promoted and praised for his skills. However, young Jasmine's skills go largely unnoticed. She is slower to progress in her career and receives little acknowledgement for her strengths."

"The first rungs of our career ladder disproportionately favor the technical and detail-oriented star. It's only on the higher rungs, in senior career stages, that emotional, relational, and large picture skills become crucial above all else. By the time relational and emotional skills are finally valued, many who excel in them have already fallen or stepped off the ladder. Our career template was developed for a single kind of worker-the "ideal" white male, unencumbered by caregiving -and disadvantages those who don't fit this mold. Instead of questioning the design, we label the individuals who fail to climb as "lacking," when in truth many women and minorities are round pegs forced into square holes."

Early-career roles reward solitary technical excellence, long hours, and detail orientation, producing rapid advancement for those who fit that profile. Relational, emotional, and big-picture skills become central only at senior levels, by which time many who excel at them have been marginalized or left the ladder. The standard career template reflects the needs and life circumstances of an "ideal" worker—typically a white male without caregiving responsibilities—and systematically disadvantages those with different strengths or obligations. Redesigning careers and organizational systems to recognize diverse skills, non-linear trajectories, and equitable advancement criteria is necessary to create fairer outcomes.

Read at Psychology Today