Gender gap in the workplace sponsorship: Who benefits most?

In many industries, sponsorship is widely regarded as a critical lever for career advancement. But a new study from the University of California, San Diego’s Rady School of Management showed that men and women approach workplace sponsorship in strikingly different ways, with implications for career development, equity initiatives, and organisational policy.

Published in the Academy of Management Journal, the study found that men often see sponsorship as a tool to advance their own careers, while women tend to focus on the success of their proteges.

“Female sponsors juggle multiple priorities, balancing their own career interests with the needs of their proteges,” said Elizabeth L. Campbell, Assistant Professor of Management at UC San Diego Rady School and lead author of the study. “In contrast, men tend to focus more on how providing sponsorship benefits their own careers. This was especially true of men more senior in their role – as men gain experience as sponsors, they increasingly view providing sponsorship to their proteges as a way they can advance their own success.”

For women, the approach remains consistent: their sponsorship is protégé-centred, regardless of seniority.

The research, which drew on surveys and experiments involving over 1,400 participants across multiple industries, explored both goal setting and network-building behaviours. In one survey of more than 800 managers, women were more likely to set goals aimed at the success of their proteges, whereas men’s goals tended to focus on their own advancement. In a separate experiment of nearly 600 participants, men activated broad social networks – connecting with individuals they rarely interact with – whereas women relied on dense networks of close, interconnected contacts.

READ MORE: Why the future of work depends on the future of learning

“This difference in network activation that our paper finds raises another question: Which approach is more likely to advance the career of the protégé?” Campbell noted. Broad networks, typically favoured by men, provide diverse information and opportunities, while dense networks, favoured by women, foster stronger, supportive relationships. “In terms of sponsorship, it’s an open question that research is examining right now.”

The findings carry significant implications for organisations seeking to promote diversity and inclusion through sponsorship programmes. Simply encouraging leaders to “sponsor more” may not suffice if men and women provide sponsorship in fundamentally different ways. There is a risk that women may shoulder a disproportionate burden in driving workplace inclusion.

“We might need to rethink how we train leaders to sponsor,” Campbell said. “Should we encourage everyone to sponsor more like men, thinking about how to sponsor proteges in a way that helps you too? Or should we push for a more protégé-focused approach like women tend to use? It’s a big question, and one worth exploring further.”