Abstract

Women have been pushing and pushing over the years to find space in fields which were not inclusive to begin with. Even in 2025, while one might expect that women and men would be equally represented in decision-making positions across all research sectors, within universities, institutions, and industry, fostering research in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields, the gap is still open.

This study is about exploring how women in leadership positions may affect the career satisfaction, advancement opportunities, and retention of women professionals in STEM fields, particularly within research settings. Both the structural and cultural barriers that women face in pursuing leadership roles, as well as the enabling factors that support their career progression will be investigated.

Methodology

A quantitative survey methodology was employed for the research, gathering responses from 132 women working in research in STEM-related roles across various European and international settings. Leadership aspirations, experienced barriers (including gender bias, lack of mentorship, and work-life balance pressures), and attitudes toward organizational policies aimed at improving gender equality were examined along with a quantitative analysis of the answers to the open-ended questions of participants and a comparative analysis which was conducted among respondents who had gained professional experience under the leadership of a female supervisor and those who had not, across sectors and in relation to existing formal studies.

Key Findings

• Persistent structural and cultural barriers, particularly lack of confidence, inadequate mentorship, and difficulties between work and personal life, were identified as the main obstacles to leadership aspirations through the analysis of the findings.
• Most women surveyed had not applied for leadership roles. Notably, women in academia and industry showed higher application rates compared to those in research institutes, where mentorship gaps and rigid organizational structures were more present. Women in industry exhibited greater leadership ambition, however, they reported stronger perceptions of structural resistance and gender bias in promotions.
• Mentorship was valued more by respondents who had worked under female supervisors, and they consistently reported increased career satisfaction.
• It was observed that long-term retention intent was not significantly impacted by the presence of female leadership.
• Participants, by identifying the current initiatives as moderate, seem thirsty for reshaping the structural norms so as to include a flexible work schedule, explicit promotion requirement, and targeted leadership development activities, in order to effect meaningful change. Women who had female supervisors were more likely to feel encouraged, whereas this is not enough.
• The hypotheses tests revealed statistically significant differences in how women in different sectors view the importance of mentoring and the barriers to leadership, particularly in relation to institutional culture and support networks. However, there was no appreciable difference in respondents' retention intent based solely on whether they had a female supervisor suggesting that while important, this factor alone is insufficient against systemic inequities.

Conclusions

This study makes a significant contribution to the existing literature on gender equity in STEM leadership by employing a multidimensional and sector-specific analysis of women’s experiences in research-intensive roles across sectors.

Although the presence of a female supervisor was associated with more positive perceptions, statistical analysis showed that representation alone did not significantly predict retention, reinforcing the argument that structural change is substantial for women. Furthermore, it identifies notable sectoral variation in how gender equity initiatives are perceived. Thus, one-size-fits-all solutions should not be employed.