In 1978, Marilyn Loden was the final panelist to present in a session on “messages of limitation which confront women and the effect on aspirations.” In turn, each of the panelists described women’s failures to get ahead -- women didn’t have high enough self-esteem, or were inadequately socialized for leadership roles. Women, in short, were to blame for their collective lack of professional advancement. When it was Loden’s turn to speak, she chose to describe invisible, and yet systemic, barriers that hindered women’s career progression and, over time, created a climate in which they were less likely to aspire to attain the leadership positions that felt far beyond their collective grasp. The term that she coined to describe this phenomenon was “glass ceiling.”

Nearly 40 years after that panel was convened, the glass ceiling is alive and well in the architectural profession. According to the 2016 Equity in Architecture Survey, respondents -- both male and female -- are nine times as likely to work in a firm that was mostly, or entirely, led by men as they were to work in a majority or completely female-led office. While “glass ceiling” was originally coined to describe the challenges that women face, these barriers within the architectural profession hinder people of color as well as women as they strive to attain top leadership positions within the profession. Both of these groups are less likely than white men to be principals or partners in firms at nearly every level of experience. Even though today’s cohort of emerging professionals includes a significant increase in women and an uptick in people of color (although we still have a long way to go before we reach equal representation), the highest rungs of the profession remain pervasively white, and male.

We need to think seriously about the implications that this imbalance at the highest levels of practice might have on the future of the profession. Are we mentoring and training emerging leaders in an equitable manner? Are we restructuring our promotion processes to identify and mitigate the effects of implicit bias? In short, are today’s leaders taking the necessary steps to advance the interests of all employees by fostering a management culture that champions equitable and just practices to achieve true diversity and inclusion?

Results from the 2016 Equity in Architecture Survey enable us to begin to answer these questions, and to provide insight into whether there’s a glass ceiling in architecture, and into the ways that each of us might begin to cultivate equitable practices and policies that result in true diversity of representation and thought leadership in our firms. This story has several parallel threads. First, we’ll quantify the leadership gap in architecture – does race or gender matter when considering likelihood of being a firm leader? Are there characteristics of firm leaders’ positions that vary on the basis of race or gender? Next, we’ll examine the importance of equitable representation amongst leadership to all employees – does working in a firm that has a diverse leadership team matter to one’s career perceptions or access to opportunities like mentorship? Finally, we’ll examine pathways to leadership – how does a firm’s review and promotion process correlate with career perceptions? And does ambition vary by gender or race?

Measuring the Glass Ceiling

At nearly every level of experience, women and people of color were less likely than white men to hold leadership positions within architecture firms. White men held an even greater advantage over other respondents when only top leadership positions were considered, and were significantly more likely to be principals or partners in firms at almost every level of experience. There were also significant differences between male and female principals’ and partners’ leadership positions, compensation, and experiences. Male principals and partners were more likely to lead larger firms and made more money, on average, than female principals within the sample. While deserving of attention in and of itself, this leadership gap also contributed significantly to differences in men’s and women’s career perceptions. Principals and partners -- both male and female -- had more positive career perceptions on average than those who were not principals in their firms.

Infographic Slides 2017

Likelihood of Being a Titled Firm Leader

Women and people of color were less likely to be firm leaders at every level of experience. This leadership gap is at its greatest amongst those with 11-13 years of experience, with 60% of men in that category, but only 38% of non-white men, 43% of white women, and 42% of non-white women, holding a titled leadership position. Amongst those with 11 or more years of experience, white men are most likely to hold firm leadership positions at each level of experience, followed by white women, and then by men and women of color.

Likelihood of Being a Principal

Women and people of color were less likely to be principals or partners in a firm at every level of experience, with men of color least likely of any group to hold this title. Significant gaps emerged amongst those with more than 10 years of experience, and generally increased as level of experience increased.

These gaps, paired with findings on likelihood of being a titled firm leader, suggests that white women, men of color, and women of color progress into mid-level titled positions at only slightly lower rates than white men, but are much less likely to make the jump into principal or partner positions.

Likelihood of Being a Principal by Firm Size

Firm size was significantly correlated with likelihood of being a principal or partner, with those working in the smallest firms most likely to be principals or partners at every level of experience.

Likelihood of Being a Principal by Caregiver Status

Amongst both male and female respondents, parents were slightly more likely than those without children to be principals or partners at nearly every level of experience (women without children with 26 or more years of experience were slightly more likely than those with children to be principals or partners). For both men and women the widest “parent advantage” in terms of firm leadership exists between 14 and 18 years of experience.

Principals/Partners: Firm Size

In addition to being less likely to be principals or partners in firms, women and people of color who did hold these titles tended to make less money, and manage smaller firms, on average, than male principals and partners. Amongst principals and partners, female partners were slightly more likely to work in an extra-small or small firm, while male partners were more likely to work in an extra-large firm.

Principals/Partners: Equity Share by Firm Size

Not all firm leadership positions entail firm ownership. The strongest predictor of equity share amongst principals was firm size, with both male and female partners in smaller firms more likely to be equity partners, and more likely to own larger portions of their firms, than those who worked in larger firms. Within firms with fewer than 50 employees, female principals were more likely than their male counterparts to own more than half of, their firms. Meanwhile, in M, L, and XL firms, most employees owned less than 25% of their firms, and male and female partners owned similar portions of their firms.

Principals/Partners: Average Salary by Firm Size

Male principals made more, on average, than female principals in every firm size. These differences were at their starkest in XS firms, even though female partners working in these firms owned more, on average, of their firms than their male counterparts.

Average Principal Salary by Project Type

Amongst principals and partners, there was also a salary gap that varied by building type. The smallest gap existed between male and female partners working on higher education projects, with male partners making $6,000 a year more, on average than their female counterparts. Meanwhile, male partners working in healthcare earned $17,000 more, those designing corporate offices earned $19,000 more, and those designing single family residential projects earned $20,000 more

Metrics of Success by Leadership Title

Principals and partners -- both male and female -- had more positive career perceptions on average than those who were not principals in their firms. Non-principals were less likely to plan to stay in their current jobs, less likely to feel involved in the decision-making process, and less energized at work than those who were principals or partners. Among principals and partners, there were not significant differences between respondents’ career perceptions on the basis of race or gender, with one exception -- female partners’ perceptions of their work-life flexibility were 13% less positive than those of their male counterparts.

The Case for Equitable Leadership

The leadership gap in architecture clearly impacts individual practitioners’ career trajectories, and, in turn, those practitioners’ career perceptions and compensation packages. The survey also demonstrates that the lack of equity within the ranks of firm leadership impacts all employees, and not just those who may have been passed over for a promotion. While the majority of respondents reported working in firms that were mostly, or completely, led by men, respondents working in firms with equal gender representation amongst firm leadership reported more positive career perceptions. Firm leadership composition also proved to be a significant factor in a respondent’s likelihood of having access to senior firm leaders. Both male and female respondents were most likely to have a leader within their office -- either a principal or partner, or their direct manager -- to whom they could turn for career advice in offices with equally divided leadership (72% of men and 68% of women in equally divided offices). This difference in access to leaders is significant because, compared to those who received no career guidance, those who turned to a senior leader within their firm for this guidance were more more optimistic about their professional futures, more energized by their work, more likely to plan to stay at their current job.

Infographic Slides 2017

Gender Balance Amongst Firm Leadership

While 8% of our female respondents, and 5% of our male respondents, reported working in a firm that was mostly, or completely led by women, the majority of our respondents – male and female—reported working in a firm that was mostly or completely led by men.

Leadership Composition by Firm Size

Amongst male respondents, there was little variation in firm leadership composition on the basis of firm size. Amongst female respondents, however, those working in larger firms were much more likely to work in a firm that was majority male-led, with 73% of female respondents working in XL firms reporting that their firms are majority male-led, but only 52% of those working in XS firms reporting that their firms were majority male-led

Career Perceptions: All Male Led Vs. Equally Divided

Career perceptions varied significantly on the basis of firm leadership composition, with the most positive average perceptions reported amongst those working in firms with equally divided leadership. The strongest correlations were between leadership composition and career perception were in opinions of the promotion process. Compared to equally divided leadership teams, all male leadership teams’ employees had lower opinions of the promotion process (20% lower amongst women and 11% lower amongst men), lower opinions of firm culture (16% lower amongst women and 10% lower amongst men), and lower likelihood of sharing their firm’s values (13% lower amongst women and 5% lower amongst men).

Career Perceptions: Receives Guidance from Senior Firm Leader

This difference in access to leaders is significant because, compared to those who received no career guidance, those who turned to a senior leader within their firm for this type of advice were more more optimistic about their professional futures, more energized by their work, more likely to plan to stay at their current job. These correlations were stronger for female respondents with senior mentors than for male respondents.

Pathways to Leadership

Given the significant race- and gender-based differences in respondents likelihood of advancing into leadership positions, and the significant advantages that were observed amongst those who worked in environments with equitable representation amongst leadership, we were interested in the pathways into leadership positions, and respondents’ perceptions of these processes within their own work environments. We found that, amongst current firm leaders, women and people of color had typically advanced into their leadership positions at the same pace or slightly more quickly than their white male counterparts. This suggests that the pattern observed within other industries, wherein women and people of color tend to advance more slowly than white men, may not hold in architecture. Instead, women and people of color are unlikely to advance at all, but a select number of individuals from these groups are placed along the typical white male leadership trajectory.

According to Loden’s conception of the glass ceiling, gaps in leadership representation contribute over time to to gaps in perceptions of the promotion process, and eventually, ambition and career optimism. We found similar patterns within our sample. While respondents’ opinions of their firms promotion processes were low overall, female respondents were less likely than male respondents to find their promotion processes effective. This was especially true amongst women working in majority-male-led offices, with only 29% of female respondents working in these settings finding their firms’ promotion processes “very” or “somewhat effective.”

Ultimately, we did observe significant gaps between white male and female and non-white male respondents’ career ambitions, with male respondents more likely to aspire to become a principal or partner -- either through promotion or by starting a firm of their own -- at every level of experience. While there weren’t differences overall in likelihood of aspiring to become a principal or partner on the basis of race, there were significant differences in the ways that respondents aspired to attain these top leadership positions, with non-white respondents more likely to aspire to start their own firms and white respondents more likely to aspire to be promoted to a leadership position within an existing firm.

Infographic Slides 2017

Current Leaders: Average Time to Mid-Level Management

Amongst those who had been internally promoted to a mid-level management position ( (i.e. tenure at firm exceeded amount of time as titled leader within that firm), women and people of color averaged similar or slightly lower levels of experience at time of promotion than white men. Regardless of race or gender, leaders of smaller firms had been promoted earlier in their careers, on average, than those who led larger firms. SEAONC’s SE3 project has shown that a similar phenomenon occurs within structural engineering.

Current Principals: Average Time to Principal

This trend also held true for those who had been internally promoted to a principal or partner position, with female and non-white principals and partners averaging equal or lower levels of experience at time of promotion in every firm size.

Average Time to Principal by Years Experience

These gender and race-based differences in time to leadership may be attributable to the lower average level of experience of our female and non-white respondents -- the average experience level of female principals in the sample was 10.4 years experience, while the average level of experience of male principals was 17.3 years of experience. Amongst principals and partners with comparable current levels of experience, we observed that male and female respondents reported similar levels of experience at the time of their promotion. There was insufficient data to produce meaningful analysis on this data point on the basis of race or ethnicity. These findings suggest that, while women and people of color are less likely to be promoted than their white male counterparts, those who do get promoted tend to get their position on timelines comparable to those of white male firm leaders.

Perceived Efficacy of Promotion Process

Given female and racial and ethnic minorities’ underrepresentation in leadership within firms, and the gender differences that we saw between male and female partners’ experiences, we were interested to see our respondents’ opinions of their firms’ promotion processes. We saw that both male and female respondents had relatively low opinions of the effectiveness of these processes, with only 41% of men, and 32% of women describing this process as “very” or “somewhat effective

Efficacy of Promotion Process by Firm Size

The smaller the firm, the less likely a respondent was to find their firm’s promotion process “very” or “somewhat effective” (31% of those in XS firms vs. 41% of those in XL firms).

Efficacy of Promotion Process by Leadership Composition

Meanwhile, those working in firms with equally divided leadership composition -- both male and female -- were most likely to find their firm’s promotion process to be effective. Men working in majority female-led firms, and women working in majority-male led firms were least likely to believe that their firms’ promotion processes were effective.

Perceived Effectiveness of Promotion Process by Key Promotion Criteria

We did see strong correlations between perceptions of the promotion process and firms’ top criteria for promotion, with those whose firms used written criteria, performance reviews, or client relationships to determine promotion more likely to have positive views of the process, and those whose firms used principal relationships, tenure, or unclear or undefined criteria less likely to view the process as effective.

Probability of Aspiring to Principal/Partner by Experience

Male and female respondents reported different career aspirations, with male respondents more likely than their female counterparts to report aspiring to be a principal or partner -- either through promotion or by starting a firm of their own -- at every point in their careers. We also noticed that those earlier in their careers were much more likely than those with more experience to report these aspirations.

Probability of Aspiring to Start Firm by Experience

There were significant differences in how a respondent aspired to become a principal or partner on the basis of race, gender, and experience level. Those earliest in their careers, and especially men early in their careers, were most likely to aspire to start their own firm one day. At nearly every level of experience, non-white respondents of both genders were more likely than their white counterparts to aspire to start their own firm.

Probability of Aspiring to Principal/Partner via Promotion by Experience

White respondents, meanwhile, were more likely than non-white respondents to aspire to be promoted to be partner within an existing firm. White male respondents were also more likely than female and non-white male to aspire to become a principal or partner within an existing firm at every level of experience. Amongst white women, those with 8-10 years of experience were most likely to aspire to be promoted to a principal or partner position, with declining levels of aspiration amongst those in each subsequent experience bracket. Meanwhile, white male respondents with 11-25 years experience sustained high likelihoods of aspiring to be promoted to top leadership positions. While they were less likely than white respondents to aspire to be promoted to principal or partner, non-white respondents of both genders shared white male’s pattern in terms of experience level -- those in the middle of their careers were more likely than both those beginning their careers and more seasoned professionals to aspire to be promoted to a principal or partner position. This suggests that, while white female respondents’ likelihood of aspiring to be promoted to a top leadership positions peaked before they had achieved the level of experience at which these promotions tended to be occur (16 years median for female respondents), white male respondents had a high likelihood of aspiring to these promotions throughout the entire career window in which these promotions were made. Meanwhile, non-white respondents were less likely to aspire to these promotions at nearly every level of experience, instead tending to direct their aspirations towards starting their own practices.