(First published on LinkedIn on September 15, 2025)
With Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs under assault or quietly rolled back across industries, companies still plaster “diversity” and “inclusivity” across every career page—while fumbling even the most basic forms of loyalty in hiring.
Let’s cut to it: women, and especially women of color, remain painfully absent from meaningful leadership pipelines. The problem isn’t lack of talent; it’s that the process itself is a sorting machine that’s anything but loyal to equity, potential, or even sanity.
How Hiring Managers/Companies Really Hire
While companies talk about “objective” and “merit-based” hiring, the real process is messier—and quietly tilted. Too often, women get overlooked, not because they aren’t qualified, but because the very way hiring happens is stacked against them:
- Shortcut Sorting: Pressed for time, managers use shortcuts and quick judgments. Résumés or interview styles that feel “familiar” get fast-tracked, while equally talented women—especially those with less conventional backgrounds—get set aside as “not the type”.
- Tunnel Vision on Credentials: Credentials like matching degrees, uninterrupted careers, and standard job titles dominate the screening process. But women have to navigate career breaks and less linear paths far more often—penalizing them for the realities they face, not their skills.
- Bias Disguised as ‘Fit’: “Cultural fit” often means hiring those who sound and look like everyone already in the room. This keeps male-dominated teams cycling—and keeps women out.
- Gut Over Data: Hiring decisions lean on “soft signals”—like confidence or assertiveness—that are unconsciously coded as masculine. Women who don’t match this script get misjudged, even if they’d be outstanding leaders.
- Referral Networks: Men benefit more from old-boys’ network referrals, gaining job access through informal connections and networks that are often less open to women. Women more often have to apply through postings, not through the side door of personal contacts—so they start a lap behind.
Hiring processes like these don’t just miss great women leaders—they make it harder for women even to get in the running.
Hiring processes show no loyalty to women’s potential.
Trends: Women in Leadership (Still Waiting for the Wave)
Let’s talk numbers—not slogans.
- Women’s Share: About 30.6% of leadership positions globally are held by women, a baby step from years past. In U.S. manufacturing, women account for just 28% of management roles. And at the executive level, the needle barely moves for women of color—4% versus 20% for white women.
- Women of Color: Progress “at the top” for women of color remains stone-cold stagnant. Despite recent gains, structural racism and exclusionary networks limit their climb.
- Industry Divide: Women prevail in production roles in sectors like electronics (think assemblers, line workers) but are rare in heavy industrial lines like fabricated metals, glass, and maintenance—where less than 17% of workers are women, and line supervisors are still overwhelmingly male.
- Office Worker Paradox: Women constitute over half of manufacturing’s sales and office jobs but are funneled into administrative support, not leadership. Even in these female-majority pockets, they report to male bosses.
Hurdles: What’s Broken (Besides the Pipeline)?
1. Leadership Potential—Screened Out, Not In
- Assessment Failures: Most hiring and HR processes are so fixated on “track record” that they ignore or undervalue leadership potential, especially in women candidates. Research shows women must demonstrate actual performance, not just potential, to even be considered—a double standard rarely applied to men.
- Line Manager Bottleneck: Even in “diverse” environments, the leap from staff to line leader remains gated by invisible tests, subjective judgments, and networking hurdles that systematically exclude women.
2. The Degree “Requirement” Trap
- Overblown Credentials: College degrees open doors, but too often they’re a lazy shortcut for measuring readiness instead of a true requirement. For many jobs—especially on the factory floor or entry-level leadership—a degree says little about street smarts, adaptability, or people management.
- Blocking Talent: Mandating degrees for roles that require grit, learning agility, and teamwork short-circuits internal mobility for the very women who understand the business from the inside.
3. Job Description Nonsense
- Empty Demands: Most job postings are a wish list of “must-haves” with zero transparency about company culture or what makes a place worth staying. They preach requirements—rarely values.
- Alienating Prospects: Bad job descriptions push away great candidates before they even apply. This especially hurts women and underrepresented candidates, who are less likely to apply unless they hit every single item on the list and/or feel that the company cares about them as employees.
- Missing Loyalty: Nowhere do companies explain how they support and promote women—or what they actually offer in exchange for loyalty, perseverance, and results.
Job postings show no loyalty to candidates’ time or trust.
Job postings can really get my blood boiling. I have often seen ‘dream jobs’ advertised, but after clicking on the expanded description, it became clear that the company only had their interest at mind. We want, we need, you must have this, xyz – don’t even bother. I don’t want to work for a company that only lists demands. And, as a writer, it annoys me even more when there is no consistency in how the posting has been created, tasks are all over the place in grammatical diversity and, to top it all off, riddled with errors. If you can’t be precise in a job posting, why should candidates expect precision in how you’ll treat them?
I can’t stress this enough. If you fail at job postings, it says a lot about you as a company. Hiring is all about people, and if you don’t grasp that, then you will have a lot of turnover. Just not where you want it.
4. Loyalty—One-Way Street
- Old Boys’ Club Lives: Despite all the talk, most hiring decisions at leadership levels remain risk-averse and cliquish. Managers select for “familiar” over “game-changer.” Women and women of color? They’re seen as risky outliers, not loyal insiders.
- Support Roles, Not Head Roles: Even in industries where women fill the ranks, they’re left out of the succession plan.
Kudos to the Quiet Champions 🌟
Let’s take a moment to recognize the HR professionals—many of whom are women themselves—who work every day to open doors for female talent in manufacturing. They’re reworking job descriptions, pushing for fair interviews, and personally advocating for candidates who deserve a shot.
But here’s the irony: HR is one of the few fields where women actually form the majority (over 70% of HR managers are female), yet too often, even these gatekeepers are blocked by the very systems they serve. Senior leadership, old-school line managers, or entrenched company cultures can shut down progressive hiring efforts—sometimes bluntly, sometimes with a dozen “why rock the boat?” questions in a row.
To the HR champions who try—and sometimes get shut down—this isn’t invisible. Your fight matters, and the frustration is real: It’s a strange world when the very people who want to champion equity can’t even get their own gender properly represented on the factory floor.
So, if you’re one of those inside-advocates carrying the torch for female talent, this is a thank you. May your persistence pay off—and may you get more backup from the folks upstairs, not just back office applause.
What Companies Must Change (Hint: Almost Everything)
Screen for Potential, Not Just Paper: Dump the degree obsession. Prioritize skills, adaptability, and internal references from people who actually watch candidates work their magic daily.
Rewrite Job Descriptions: Make them about who thrives here—not just what the company wants. Show what the company gives back, how it supports real growth, and how it cultivates loyalty across the board.
Diversify Interview Panels: Don’t let any one gatekeeper (usually, a white guy in a tie) “run” the selection alone. Representation on panels matters.
Promote Inclusive Leadership Training: Build up more first-line female managers through mentorship, targeted development, and formal opportunities—not just lip service.
Track & Share Advancement Data: Hold leadership accountable for who gets promoted—not just who gets hired. Show the receipts for diversity, loyalty, and equity.
Value Street Smarts: Innovators aren’t always degree-holders. The best leaders often start on the floor, not in a classroom. Stop penalizing nontraditional resumes.
Challenge Outdated Assumptions About Capability: Drop the bias that equates leadership or factory-floor readiness with physical strength or outdated “fit” stereotypes.
Redefine Loyalty in the Numbers: Don’t just track headcount or turnover—measure who stays and why.
Conclusion: Hiring for Loyalty Means Rethinking Everything
You want loyal workers? Stop building your hiring machine to spit out clones. Break the mold, reward potential, and broadcast what you offer—not just what you demand. The future of industry won’t be built by companies that treat hiring as a box-check for degrees and conformity. It will belong to those who create cultures where the best—no matter who they are or where they started—can lead, stay, and thrive.
Because loyalty in hiring is a two-way contract. Companies that forget that don’t just lose women—they lose the future of their workforce.
How About Your Experience? 👀
🔍 Have you seen strong female candidates get sidelined by “the way it’s always been done”? 🗣️ Or been part of a hiring process where difference was quietly filtered out? 🏭 Whether you’re leading a team or just starting out, how have hiring choices impacted women’s access to real opportunity?
💬 Share your story below! Progress on the factory floor starts with real conversation, and your insight could spark change for someone else.
🏭 Factory Floor Forward
Ready to build a better factory floor? Progress happens when leadership and workers trust each other enough to build it—together.