In today’s highly competitive industries, workplace sponsorship is increasingly recognised as a decisive factor in career progression. Yet new research from the Rady School of Management at the University of California, San Diego, suggests that men and women often view the practice through markedly different lenses. According to the study, recently published in the Academy of Management Journal, men are more likely to see sponsorship as a means of accelerating their own professional advancement. At the same time, women place stronger emphasis on ensuring the success of those they sponsor.

The findings raise important questions about how organisations design sponsorship initiatives, and whether female leaders should shoulder a disproportionate share of responsibility in the pursuit of equity and inclusion at work. “Female sponsors juggle multiple priorities, balancing their own career interests with the needs of their protégés,” explained Elizabeth L. Campbell, assistant professor of management at UC San Diego and the study’s lead author. “In contrast, men tend to concentrate on how providing sponsorship enhances their own careers. This tendency was particularly evident among more senior men, who increasingly viewed sponsorship as a strategic tool for advancing their own success.”

For women, however, the pattern was strikingly consistent. Regardless of their level of experience or seniority, they continued to frame sponsorship in terms of the protégé’s goals and development rather than their own. This difference was borne out across a series of surveys and experiments. In one survey involving over 800 managers from diverse industries, participants were asked to set developmental goals for their protégés. Women typically established goals that prioritised their protégés’ advancement, while men set fewer such goals and were more likely to align them with their personal career trajectories.

The research also explored the social networks that men and women draw upon when engaging in sponsorship. In an experiment with nearly 600 participants, individuals were asked to identify up to ten people they would turn to for sponsorship-related support. Men tended to activate broad networks, reaching out to weaker ties who provided diverse streams of information and opportunity. Women, by contrast, leaned on denser networks of close, interconnected colleagues, reflecting a strategy rooted in trust and stronger relational bonds. As Campbell observed, this raises further questions about which approach better serves the protégé. “Sociological evidence suggests that broad networks offer greater access to fresh information and opportunities,” she noted, “but dense networks may foster deeper, more supportive relationships. The most effective model of sponsorship may well depend on context.”

These gender-based distinctions hold significant implications for workplace policy. Many organisations have introduced sponsorship programmes as part of their diversity and equity strategies, often encouraging leaders to “sponsor more.” Yet this research suggests such blanket approaches may overlook the nuances in how men and women conceptualise sponsorship. If men frame the practice in ways that also benefit themselves, while women focus disproportionately on their protégés, women may inadvertently carry a heavier burden in advancing workplace inclusion. “We might need to rethink how we train leaders to sponsor,” Campbell concluded. “Should everyone be encouraged to adopt a more self-interested approach, or should we push toward the more protégé-centred model women exemplify? It’s an open question, and one that future research must grapple with.”

With sponsorship continuing to shape career mobility, the study underscores the importance of recognising and addressing these gender differences. By doing so, both employees and employers can move towards more equitable, balanced, and ultimately practical approaches to workplace advancement.

More information: Elizabeth Campbell et al, The Gendered Complexity of Sponsorship: How Male and Female Sponsors’ Goals Shape Their Social Network Strategies, Academy of Management Journal. DOI: 10.5465/amj.2023.1110

Journal information: Academy of Management Journal Provided by University of California – San Diego