Women's networks are considered a key measure in many companies for increasing the proportion of women in leadership positions. A new study by Prof. Dr. Karin Kreutzer (EBS University of Business and Law, Germany), Patricia Hein (Ivey Business School, Canada) and Maikki Diehl (Aalto University, Finland) shows that whether such formats actually promote empowerment or unintentionally reinforce existing inequalities depends crucially on how they are designed.

The study, which was recently published in the Journal of Management, is based on a three-year qualitative investigation. The authors observed 40 women's network meetings in Germany and the United Kingdom, conducted 75 interviews with participants and organisers, and evaluated extensive secondary data.

Three meanings of networks

A key finding of the study is that women associate three different meanings with women-specific networks: status-driven, instrumental and expressive. Which of these meanings dominates is largely determined by organisational conditions.

‘Many companies want to promote equality through women's networks. However, our findings show that these initiatives can quickly become counterproductive if they are primarily aimed at adapting women to existing – often male-dominated – practices,’ explains Karin Kreutzer.

The paradox of well-intentioned equality

The authors are particularly critical of a paradoxical pattern: although companies emphasise equality, they reproduce subtle forms of discrimination through certain network formats. In research, this is referred to as ‘benevolent sexism’ – a seemingly benevolent attitude that addresses women as vulnerable recipients of support and tends to slow down rather than strengthen collective action. Instead of questioning structural inequalities, women thus find themselves in the role of those who are expected to adapt to existing power and career dynamics.

When women's networks are effective

The study also shows the conditions under which women's networks can realise their potential. They are particularly successful when:

•    they are focused on concrete results rather than symbolic visibility,
•    they work in a forward-looking manner and do not address perceived deficits,
•    they break down hierarchies so that women can shape the formats independently.

‘Networks are not a tool for repairing individual deficits, but can be a vehicle for structural change – if companies are willing to relinquish control and take on a supportive role in the background,’ says Kreutzer. Women's network meetings can be valuable tools for empowerment and career advancement. However, this requires that they are not seen as well-intentioned ‘help,’ but as a space to highlight and change discriminatory structures.