Women Run Less Than 25% of Nonprofits: How Organizations Can Change That

A staggering 75 percent of workers in the nonprofit sector are women, according to the most recent data available from the American Association of University Women. The high percentage of women working in nonprofits should translate to higher numbers of female-led organizations in the sector. But only 42 percent of nonprofit boards are led by women, while only 22 percent of nonprofits are run by a woman executive director or CEO. The percentage of female-led nonprofit boards drops to 33 percent when it comes to organizations with incomes of $25 million or more, according to Nonprofit Quarterly.

The irony is that nonprofits work to make the world more equitable, but even within the sector, hiring practices skew towards male leadership despite a wealth of women workers in the field. This also seems to have a knock-on effect on the gender pay gap.  On average, women earn around 25 percent less than men in the nonprofit sector, according to research by the National Council of Nonprofits. So why is progress slow?

With over 20 years of experience in nonprofit executive searches and transitions, Sara Garlick Lundberg said it all comes down to not working hard enough to get rid of implicit bias, which nonprofits should be aware of and work on internally. Sexist and misogynistic biases should be purged from any hiring process within organizations seeking to increase female leadership in their ranks.

“People use the term ‘executive presence’ a lot which is a term that really gets under my skin,” said Lundberg, the managing partner of nonprofit search practice for North America at DHR Global, pointing out the kinds of biases that should be re-examined. “It makes me cringe because these are qualities and characteristics that are more traditionally identified as male qualities. There’s that confidence that our society identifies as inherently male when you’re looking at leadership positions — that is, very often, people are looking for someone who will be compelling, someone who can speak convincingly to their staff.”

Another issue is that leadership roles are usually given to people in their mid-to-late 30s, so decision-makers preemptively question whether women eligible for these positions will be having children and starting a family at this age, Lundberg said. Boards of directors should recognize these biases during the interview process, check if their assumptions of candidates are about their gender, and recalibrate accordingly.  

“If the candidate is around this age, her commitments outside of the office are absolutely being questioned. If not explicitly, they are very often being questioned implicitly,” Lundberg said. “This doesn’t happen all the time, but it does happen very often. People assume that mothers can't bear the burden of a busy executive position, but that same question or assumption is almost never made of male candidates.” 

For women of color, the reality is even worse. Research shows they are particularly burdened in the sector, rarely being offered positions of leadership and taking on the majority of the work. Ultimately, implicit bias results in a lack of will to put women of color in these positions. It can paint a woman of color as unqualified for the job, especially when it comes to demonstrating professionalism that is usually associated with whiteness. Non-white hair styles, different cultural backgrounds, and socioeconomic differences can come across as unprofessional for people who haven’t challenged these biases within their own perceptions. 

Things will change, but they simply are not progressing quickly enough, Lundberg said.

“There are some extra hurdles that come with being women,” Lundberg explains. “For example, you go off to a conference and all the guys are playing golf, which socioeconomically or racially is not something you are familiar with. I didn’t grow up in a family with the financial means to play golf, for example. So there are day-to-day barriers to inclusion and day-to-day barriers in the interview process.”

These “hidden” barriers present real obstacles for women to network and informally gauge opportunities for their own professional growth. Organizations should be investing in networking spaces that feel familiar to all kinds of people, rather than fancy retreats and conferences. It’s up to the organizations trying to improve on their gender bias to create spaces where female candidates feel comfortable being themselves to show off their skills.  

Diverse hiring is only one step in increasing the number of women of color leaders in an organization. The culture within an organization has to be hospitable to the demands of people of all kinds. For allies who want to help women of color get there, Lundberg recommends being an active resource for them in navigating the organization. 

“Within your organization, make sure people are doing okay,” Lundberg said. “You don't have to be a formal mentor to someone to check in with them and say, ‘Hey, how are things going? How are you feeling?’ Be a good listener. Reach out or respond when people need you.”

Organizations should look to promote existing diverse workers, too. Championing women of color is also about getting them ready for leadership positions, and actually offering them those positions, Lundberg said. Once women do become leaders, they often lack support from boards. So organizations need to have a solid onboarding process to make sure they can succeed.

“Is this organization saying, how are we going to support this person and make sure that they're successful? What does onboarding look like?” Lundberg said. “Onboarding is a really important process. A thoughtful onboarding for a leader in an organization should take over a year. The frequency of checkpoints and touch points can change over the course of the year, but onboarding should take a full year. Someone should always be checking in with you at six months, at nine months, and saying: ‘How's it going? What's working? What isn't working?’”

At the end of the day, boards of directors need to remember that diversity is a good thing, Lundberg said. A diverse candidate can change an organization for good. “Leaders and staff members should be saying, ‘Okay, this is awesome. We've got someone who's a little different in A and B ways. How can we learn from this person?’”