Is climbing the corporate ladder really a straight shot, or a maze of invisible walls? From unconscious bias and the “double bind” to the unpaid “office housework” tax, crystal-ceiling barriers disproportionately stall women, people of color, LGBTQ+ colleagues and those with disabilities. Intersectionality multiplies these obstacles, creating unique challenges for every identity.
Real change means moving beyond awareness to structural action: measure pay gaps and promotion rates by gender and ethnicity; implement blind, structured hiring and evaluation; formalize sponsorship programs; and recognize emotional labor as career-advancing work. Dismantling the maze isn’t just fair—it’s the fastest route to unlocking talent, innovation and true workplace equity.
We are often told a story that resembles a modern-day fairy tale. It is the story of meritocracy: work hard, prove your worth and you will gradually climb the ladder of success. The image is that of a sturdy, straight ladder where each step is the result of your own efforts. It is a powerful and reassuring narrative. However, for millions of people, this ladder soon proves to be an illusion. Instead, they find themselves facing an intricate maze full of dead ends and secret passages reserved for the few. Above all, there are invisible walls.
These walls are not made of brick or concrete. There are no written laws or company regulations that clearly state, ‘You cannot pass.’ They are systemic barriers woven into the fabric of our work culture and built with the subtle threads of unconscious bias, social norms and unspoken expectations. These invisible forces slow down or block the careers of women, people of colour, LGBTQ+ individuals, people with disabilities, and anyone who does not fit the traditional profile of a ‘leader’. Analysing these barriers is not about complaining; it is a fundamental step in understanding why the top echelons of our organisations remain so homogeneous even today.
Beyond the glass ceiling: a map of the maze
The most famous metaphor used to describe these barriers is that of the ‘glass ceiling’: the idea of an invisible barrier preventing women from reaching the highest positions. While effective, this image does not tell the whole story. It suggests that the path is straightforward and unobstructed until a certain point, at which it suddenly stops. In reality, the situation is much more complicated.
Sociologists Alice Eagly and Linda Carli have suggested a more fitting metaphor: the maze. Career advancement is not a simple climb, but rather a winding journey full of challenges and crossroads at every turn. For those belonging to the historically dominant group (white, heterosexual men without disabilities), the path through the maze is clearer and has fewer obstacles. For everyone else, however, every turn may present a new challenge or an invisible barrier. Let’s examine some of these barriers together.
The wall of unconscious bias: the ‘like me’ club
This is perhaps the most difficult barrier to overcome. Without realising it, we all have unconscious biases; they are the mental shortcuts our brains use to interpret the world around us. At work, this often translates into the aforementioned ‘affinity bias’ or ‘similar to me effect’: we tend to trust, promote and evaluate people who are similar to us more highly, whether in terms of background, communication style or even appearance.
This is almost never a conscious or malicious choice. For example, a manager does not think, ‘I will promote John instead of Sarah because he is a man like me.’ Rather, they find themselves thinking, ‘I get along well with John. We understand each other instantly. He has the right “leadership potential”.’ However, this ‘potential’ is often simply a reflection of his own characteristics.
This mechanism creates a vicious circle at the top: the famous ‘old boys’ club’, which today has expanded to include people with the same socio-economic background or who attended the same university. For a person of colour, whose name on their CV can trigger prejudice even before the interview, or for a neurodivergent person who communicates differently, this is one of the first — and highest — walls to overcome.
The Barbed Wire of Perception: The Dilemma of the ‘Double Bind’
This barrier weighs particularly heavily on women. The so-called ‘double bind’ is a situation in which you can never seem to win, no matter what you do. Women are expected to be collaborative, empathetic and kind. If they behave in this way, they are appreciated as excellent colleagues, but are unlikely to be seen as potential leaders — they are considered ‘too soft’. Conversely, if they display qualities traditionally associated with leadership, such as assertiveness, decisiveness and ambition, they are often penalised and perceived as ‘aggressive’, ‘bossy’ or ‘pushy’.
An assertive man? A born leader. An assertive woman? ‘Difficult.’ This double standard forces many women to tread a fine line: they must be competent without being threatening, and authoritative without seeming bossy. This exhausting balancing act consumes energy that could be better spent elsewhere, perhaps at work. This mechanism does not only affect women, either. Other identities also pay the price. For example, a black man who expresses his frustration risks being labelled immediately as ‘the angry black man’, a racist stereotype that silences his legitimate opinion.
The Invisibility Tax: Emotional Labour and ‘Office Housework’
There is a surprising amount of work that is essential to the smooth running of a company, yet it is never mentioned in job descriptions and does not lead to promotion. Often referred to as ‘office housework’, this work includes organising a colleague’s birthday party, taking notes during meetings, helping newcomers settle in, and mediating minor (or major) conflicts within the team. Research shows that women end up doing this type of work disproportionately often, as they are often attributed a greater “predisposition” to care and organisation without much thought. Added to this is emotional labour: managing one’s own emotions and those of others to maintain a peaceful atmosphere. This is a task that weighs heavily on women, and in other contexts on people of colour, who often find themselves having to educate their white colleagues on diversity issues. This work is indispensable, yet almost always invisible. It is an unpaid tax that steals time and energy from the more ‘visible’ and strategic tasks that advance one’s career.
The sponsorship void: the difference between a mentor and an ally
We often hear that, to advance your career, you need a good mentor. A mentor provides advice and guidance to help you stay on track. However, if we are honest, there is something even more important: having a sponsor. A sponsor doesn’t just offer advice; they are someone in a position of power who invests their political capital in you. They recommend you for important projects, mention your name in meetings where key decisions are made and defend your reputation.
The problem? These sponsorships often arise from informal relationships that develop in contexts such as a round of golf, after-work drinks or a chat at the gym — environments from which many people from minority groups are often excluded. Due to so-called ‘affinity bias’, leaders tend to sponsor people who are similar to them, i.e. young people who remind them of themselves at the beginning of their careers. This creates a barrier to accessing the power networks that really matter, preventing many talented individuals from ever seeing the right doors open.
The multiplier effect of intersectionality: when barriers overlap
It is important to understand that these barriers do not simply add up; they multiply. Introduced by lawyer Kimberlé Crenshaw, the concept of intersectionality teaches us precisely this. A person’s various identities, such as gender, race, social class, sexual orientation and ability, are intertwined, resulting in unique and frequently more complex experiences of discrimination.
For instance, the experience of a white woman in the workplace is different from that of a black woman. The latter does not face only sexism or only racism, but a specific form of discrimination that combines both: the familiar concept of ‘misogynoir’. For her, the ceiling blocking her path is not made of glass, but reinforced concrete — the so-called ‘concrete ceiling’ — which is much thicker and more difficult to break through. Similarly, a gay man of colour will face different obstacles to a white gay man or a heterosexual woman of colour.
Ignoring intersectionality means making the experiences of those at the intersection of multiple forms of marginalisation invisible. This is a mistake we cannot afford to make.
Breaking Down Walls: From Awareness to Structural Action
Making these walls visible is only the first step; it is not enough. We cannot expect those who suffer from these walls to break them down alone, especially when they are told to simply ‘assert themselves more’ (lean in). Real change must be systemic and start with the organisations themselves.
Companies must stop relying on impressions and start measuring what is actually happening within them. Promotion rates, pay gaps and representation at all levels must be analysed, with the data broken down by gender, ethnicity and other variables. After all, numbers don’t lie; they can clearly show where the ‘maze’ becomes more intricate and where action is needed.
Flawed processes such as hiring, evaluation and promotion should be deconstructed and redesigned to limit the influence of bias as much as possible. In practice, this means adopting structured interviews with panels of interviewers from different backgrounds and defining clear, objective evaluation criteria. Where possible, blind review techniques should also be used for CVs and performance. This ensures that everyone is given the same opportunities based on merit and skills.
Formalise sponsorship: Rather than relying on chance or typical informal networks, companies can implement structured programmes to ensure that all promising talent, regardless of their background, has the opportunity to connect with influential leaders who can give their careers a decisive boost.
Recognise and reward invisible work: Organisations should find concrete ways to recognise and value both ‘office housework’ and emotional labour. This could mean including these tasks in performance evaluation criteria or ensuring they are distributed fairly among all team members, regardless of gender.
Of course, the idea of a pure meritocracy is reassuring, but it risks ignoring the power and privilege dynamics that actually shape our society and workplaces. Advancing your career is not like climbing a straight staircase in an empty building; it is more akin to navigating a crowded maze, where the very architecture benefits some and hinders others.
Breaking down these invisible walls is not just a matter of social justice; it is also a fundamental strategic choice. A company that allows systemic barriers to stifle the potential of a significant proportion of its employees is, in effect, sacrificing talent, creativity and innovation. True success in the 21st century will not go to the companies that build the highest ladders, but to those that have the courage to dismantle the mazes and finally create an open field where everyone can run at the same speed.