In 2018, global consulting giant Ernst & Young (EY) faced intense backlash after details emerged of a leadership development program exclusively for female executives. Designed to empower women in a competitive corporate landscape, the session instead delivered counsel steeped in antiquated gender norms, prompting widespread condemnation and a swift program cancellation.
The Controversial Program Unveiled
The ‘Power-Presence-Purpose’ (PPP) workshop, facilitated by external consultant Marsha Clark & Associates, targeted around 30 high-level women at EY’s New Jersey office. Participants received a 55-page guide packed with directives on personal presentation and interpersonal dynamics, ostensibly to navigate male-dominated hierarchies effectively.
Central to the materials was a self-assessment quiz forcing attendees to score themselves on binary masculine and feminine attributes. Masculine qualities celebrated leadership hallmarks like ambition, decisiveness, and assertiveness, while feminine ones leaned into stereotypes such as childlike demeanor, gullibility, and emotional soothing—none tied to professional prowess. The implication? Women must amplify ‘feminine’ traits for success or face penalties from peers of both genders.
Appearance Guidelines That Crossed Lines
Appearance advice dominated the presentation, urging meticulous grooming: a sharp haircut, manicured nails, and attire tailored to body shape for a ‘polished’ look. Yet, it veered into objectification with stark warnings like ‘Don’t flaunt your body—sexuality scrambles the mind (for men and women)’. Such language reduced professional competence to physical restraint, echoing outdated views on women’s bodies as workplace distractions.
- Key grooming mandates: Healthy, fit physique; professional yet flattering clothing.
- Behavioral cautions: Avoid overt sexuality to maintain focus.
- Overall tone: Prioritize ‘femininity’ to blend into corporate expectations.
This approach ignored modern diversity standards, instead reinforcing the notion that women’s advancement hinges on conforming to male-centric ideals.
Communication Tips Laden with Stereotypes
Beyond looks, the program dissected ‘invisible rules’ of interaction, claiming women speak tentatively, pose ideas as queries, and defer turns that never arrive. Solutions pushed assertive mimicry of male patterns—speaking boldly, claiming space—while paradoxically advocating feminine softness.
| Observed ‘Female’ Habits | Suggested Fixes |
|---|---|
| Speak briefly and questioningly | Project confidence with direct statements |
| Raise hands and wait | Interrupt strategically if needed |
| Soften edges to appease | Balance with feminine charm |
These prescriptions highlighted a double bind: emulate men to lead, yet retain ‘womanly’ allure to avoid alienation.
Timing Amid #MeToo Reckoning
Occurring mere weeks post-EY’s sexual assault lawsuit settlement and during #MeToo’s peak, the seminar’s content jarred against evolving norms. Companies nationwide revised policies for inclusivity, yet EY’s program regressed to 1950s-era tactics. An attendee, appalled, leaked materials to HuffPost, igniting media firestorm.
EY’s Response and Internal Fallout
EY quickly distanced itself, confirming the program’s discontinuation and ongoing review. A spokesperson deemed elements ‘offensive and inconsistent with core beliefs,’ noting its voluntary nature for a tiny cohort and external origins. They contested media portrayals as decontextualized, citing positive participant feedback.
‘There is no question that elements of the program included offensive content that is inconsistent with our core beliefs.’ – EY Statement
Yet, criticism mounted. Social media erupted with accusations of entrenched sexism, and a female executive publicly affirmed the materials mirrored her lived experiences at EY. This dissonance between official progressive claims and reality fueled demands for accountability.
Broader Implications for Corporate Gender Training
The scandal spotlights pitfalls in women-only leadership initiatives. While intended to address barriers—women hold just 8% of Fortune 500 CEO roles per 2023 Catalyst data—such programs risk perpetuating biases if vendor content lags cultural shifts.
Experts advocate competency-based training over gender stereotypes, emphasizing skills like strategic negotiation and resilience applicable universally. True equity demands dismantling systemic obstacles, not coaching assimilation.
Lessons for Modern Leadership Development
- Vet Vendors Rigorously: Ensure materials align with inclusive values; pilot test with diverse groups.
- Embrace Intersectionality: Tailor beyond gender to race, age, and background.
- Measure Impact: Track promotion rates and feedback post-training.
- Foster Allyship: Involve men in equity efforts.
Post-scandal, EY recommitted to inclusivity, but rebuilding trust requires transparent reforms.
Persistent Gender Gaps in Professional Services
Big Four firms like EY grapple with retention: women comprise 50% of entry-level staff but drop to 25% in senior roles, per 2022 McKinsey reports. Stereotype-laden training exacerbates this ‘leaky pipeline’ by signaling conditional belonging.
Shifting paradigms involves mentorship networks, equitable pay audits, and bias-free evaluations—proven accelerators for parity.
Frequently Asked Questions
What triggered the EY training controversy?
A leaked 55-page guide from a 2018 women’s leadership session revealed sexist advice on dress, speech, and traits.
Did EY cancel the program?
Yes, EY halted ‘Power-Presence-Purpose’ immediately, calling parts offensive and inconsistent with values.
Who created the controversial materials?
External vendor Marsha Clark & Associates developed the content for the voluntary workshop.
How did participants react?
Some rated it highly per EY, but a key attendee leaked it due to distress, and others echoed sexist culture claims.
What changes should companies make?
Prioritize inclusive, skill-focused training; audit for biases; promote systemic equity measures.
Pathways to Authentic Workplace Equity
Beyond backlash, the EY episode urges introspection. Organizations must interrogate training efficacy: Does it empower or entrench divides? Data from the World Economic Forum’s 2023 Gender Gap Report shows parity remains 132 years away; flawed programs delay progress.
Innovative models emerge: Google’s ‘re:Work’ initiative shares bias research openly; McKinsey’s diversity councils drive policy. EY could lead by disclosing audit results and partnering with equity advocates.
Ultimately, women’s leadership thrives not via stereotype navigation but barrier removal. This demands cultural evolution where competence trumps conformity, presence stems from authenticity, and purpose unites all genders.
References
- Ernst & Young blasted for ‘sexist’ leadership program — HCAMAG. 2019-12-06. https://www.hcamag.com/asia/specialisation/diversity-inclusion/ernst-young-blasted-for-sexist-leadership-program/189318
- Ernst & Young training seminar told women not to “flaunt” bodies — CBS News. 2019-12-05. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ernst-young-told-women-not-to-flaunt-bodies-because-it-scrambles-the-mind/
- Blowback from EY’s ‘appalling and outdated’ training for women — HR Executive. 2019-12-06. https://hrexecutive.com/blowback-from-eys-appalling-and-outdated-training-for-women/
