The Policy-Implementation Gap: Why Leadership Progress Can Outpace the Management Pipeline
By Priya Raman, Director of Talent Intelligence
On 3 November the International Labour Organization (ILO) published Women in Business and Management: Scaling Success. At the top, the figures show progress. Among participating enterprises with a board, the share with a woman as chair rose from 13.1 per cent in 2013 to 30.9 per cent in 2025, the ILO reports. Among those with a chief executive officer (CEO), the share led by a woman rose from 23.4 to 28.2 per cent.
Below the top, progress is slower. Since 2018, gender balance has improved less in junior and middle management than higher up. Most participating firms have an equality policy, but fewer firms ran equality initiatives in 2025 than in 2018. The ILO warns that gaps in the management pipeline and a decline in implementation "could make these gains harder to sustain".
In the World Research Institute's reading, that pairing is the more important finding. A company can meet a board-level target while the system that produces its future leaders stands still.
Balance Is Improving Faster at the Top
Beyond the surveyed firms, the ILO's modelled estimates, derived from national labour force and household surveys, cover all managers. They put women's share of management roles worldwide at 30.5 per cent in 2025, up from 24.5 per cent in 2000, the full report shows.
Inside the surveyed firms, the ILO tracks gender balance: a level where women make up 40 to 60 per cent. The table shows the share of firms in that band at each level. Changes are in percentage points, the simple difference between two percentages.
| Management level | 2013 | 2018 | 2025 | Change since 2013 | Change since 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Junior | 22.5 | 20.5 | 21.1 | −1.4 | +0.6 |
| Middle | 24.7 | 16.7 | 18.3 | −6.4 | +1.6 |
| Senior | 17.8 | 16.5 | 19.4 | +1.6 | +2.9 |
| Top | 13.0 | 14.9 | 18.0 | +5.0 | +3.1 |
Against 2013, the ILO reports falls in junior and middle management and rises higher up. "This weakens the pipeline for future leadership," it says. That baseline needs care. The 2013 survey was much smaller and included no developed countries, the report notes. The 2018 and 2025 samples, it adds, are comparable "both in size and composition".
On that comparable basis, the ILO's figures show balance edging up at every level, but least in junior and middle management. The share of firms employing women at each level also rose, the ILO reports. The headline gains hold too: in 2018 the chair share was 23.6 per cent and the CEO share 21.7 per cent.
The measure counts firms inside the band, not women's share of managers, so a level can leave it in either direction. In 2025, in every region except Europe and Central Asia, fewer firms had balance in middle than in senior management. That, the ILO says, "suggests a critical constraint in the transition from junior to middle management".
Policy Coverage Is Not the Same as Implementation
Formal policy is the norm. In 2025, 74.8 per cent of participating firms said they had an equal employment opportunity policy or a diversity and inclusion policy, the report shows. In 2018 the share was 73.3 per cent.
Reported action fell. The survey asks firms to select the areas where they run equality and diversity initiatives. Averaged across those areas, 26.5 per cent of firms reported initiatives in 2025, down from 37.4 per cent in 2018. Across the same comparable rounds, policy held steady while action fell.
In the ILO's data, the largest falls hit the measures that move people up:
- Recruitment, retention and promotion initiatives aimed at women fell from 69.6 to 36.7 per cent of firms.
- Skills training and executive leadership development fell from 60.9 to 37.3 per cent.
- Mentoring and sponsorship more than halved, from 41.8 to 20.4 per cent.
The ILO says the reasons "require further investigation" and lists four possibilities. One is that gender actions may be embedded in wider environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategies "and therefore not be reported as stand-alone initiatives". The other three would mean real change: resource constraints and competing priorities, a sense that existing measures suffice, and broader inclusion agendas less targeted at women. The ILO calls its explanations "consistent with emerging external evidence" of firms relaxing, or planning to relax, some initiatives.
Our reading is that the gap between policy coverage and active programmes is an execution-risk signal, not just a human-resources metric. A policy with no programme behind it is a commitment that has not been put to work.
Why Junior and Middle Management Decide the Outcome
The report is direct: "Junior and middle management roles form the core pipeline for future senior leaders." Weaker balance there, it adds, increases "the risk that progress at higher levels may stall or reverse over time".
Function matters as well as level. In 2025, 62.5 per cent of participating firms reported women among senior managers in human resources. Only 19.8 per cent did so in profit-and-loss roles, which answer for a unit's revenue and costs. Those roles, with research and development, "are often critical stepping stones to CEO and board-level positions", the ILO notes.
Size matters too. Among large participating firms, with more than 250 staff, 24.0 per cent had balance in junior management in 2025. The share was lower at each step up: 18.4, 17.1 and 15.7 per cent in middle, senior and top management.
In the World Research Institute's reading, this is how a board-level target can be met without a durable pipeline. A board can appoint a woman as chair in one decision. A balanced middle tier takes years of hiring, promotion and retention decisions. The programmes behind those decisions fell furthest between 2018 and 2025, while balance in the middle edged up. We therefore read the fall as a risk to future balance, not an explanation of past change.
What the Survey Can and Cannot Prove
First, the survey's page on ILOSTAT, the ILO's statistics portal, says global and regional results "reflect enterprises participating in the ILO enterprise survey". They "should be interpreted in the context of the survey sample rather than as statistical estimates representative of all enterprises globally or within each region". Answers came from individual employees, and 32.8 per cent of 2025 respondents had no management responsibilities.
Second, the samples differ across rounds. The survey drew responses from 1,048 companies in 39 countries in 2013, 12,940 in 70 countries in 2018 and 11,957 in 99 countries in 2025. The 2013 survey "was substantially smaller and did not include developed countries", the ILOSTAT page notes, so this article also gives 2018 comparisons. Some questions gained a "do not know" option in 2025.
Third, the business-outcome results are self-reported associations. Nearly seven in ten firms (68.5 per cent) said their initiatives had "contributed to improved business outcomes", up from 57.4 per cent in 2018. That is the respondent's judgement, not a measured profit effect. Of its own regression results linking policies to outcomes, the ILO writes that the relationship "does not necessarily imply causality".
Finally, in our reading, the 28.2 per cent CEO share should not be set against counts for listed companies: the ILO's sample includes unlisted and smaller enterprises.
A Management-Pipeline Scorecard
Our reading is that a board count is an output. A more useful dashboard tracks conversion: the share of people at one stage who reach the next within a set period, by gender. We suggest five stages.
- Hiring. Women's share of shortlists and hires by function, including profit-and-loss roles.
- First-line (junior) management. Promotion rates into a first management role, by gender, and the time taken.
- Middle management. Gender balance and retention rates by gender, at the junior-to-middle step where the ILO's data suggest "a critical constraint".
- Senior management. Women's presence in profit-and-loss and research roles, not only in support functions.
- Executive succession. Women on succession slates, the candidate lists for the CEO and other top roles.
The ILO asked firms that disclose ESG performance which gender indicators they use in that reporting. Flow measures came near the bottom: retention rates by gender were last, at 24.1 per cent, and promotion rates reached 29.7 per cent.
Our talent-intelligence work reads competitors' hiring from the outside; a pipeline scorecard reads a company's own promotion system from the inside. Investors can ask for more than a board count: middle-management promotion and retention rates by gender, and the make-up of succession slates.
From Annual Disclosure to Accountable Operating Metrics
A headcount on one date shows where people are, not how they move. In our reading, conversion rates belong with other operating metrics: owned by line executives, reviewed each quarter and tied to succession planning. The ILO's Director-General, Gilbert F. Houngbo, framed the task in the launch release: "The priority now is to turn policies and commitments into concrete, measurable progress."
For decision-makers, that means four things:
- Treat top-level gains as an output, not proof of a healthy pipeline. Check middle management first.
- Audit what is resourced, not what is written. For each policy, count the programmes running, their reach and their budget.
- Track conversion, not headcount. Use rolling twelve-month rates by gender for the five stages, reviewed each quarter; single quarters are noisy in small teams.
- Read survey evidence for what it is. Self-reported associations show where to look; they do not prove a return.
Evidence and data cut-off: 4 November 2026. Third-party figures are as published by the ILO in its report of 3 November 2026, its launch release and the survey's ILOSTAT page. Enterprise-survey figures are percentages of responding enterprises in the 2013, 2018 and 2025 ILO enterprise surveys; the 2018 gender-balance shares are read from the data labels of the report's Figure 19. The 30.5 per cent managerial share is an ILO modelled estimate. See our Research Standards.
The World Research Institute provides talent-intelligence programme design and workforce-signal analysis. Speak to our team to scope an engagement.