Score

Women Leadership Inclusion Index

There's a noticeable drop-off; women are well represented overall but underrepresented as seniority increases

Representation narrows somewhat at senior levels, though the gap isn't dramatic

Representation at senior levels broadly mirrors the overall workforce, and this is tracked explicitly rather than assumed

We haven't looked at this data specifically by level

Through the same general talent processes used for everyone, without a specific lens on this

Some targeted development exists, though it's informal or inconsistently applied

There's a deliberate, structured effort: identifying high-potential women early, and addressing the specific barriers (visibility, sponsorship, confidence in self-nomination) that often differ from men's experience

This hasn't been approached with any specific lens yet

Standard policy compliance, meeting the legal minimum

Policies go somewhat beyond compliance, though usage and comfort taking them up vary

Policies genuinely go beyond compliance, and are actively normalised, used without penalty, and supported by a structured, real return-to-work and re-onboarding path

This hasn't been reviewed specifically through this lens

We assume it's reasonably fair, though we haven't formally audited it

We've looked at it informally, without a rigorous or regular process

We conduct regular, structured pay-equity audits, and act on what they find, even where it requires uncomfortable correction

Mentorship relationships exist, though sponsorship in this specific sense is rare or informal

Some sponsorship happens organically, depending on individual relationships

Sponsorship is deliberately encouraged and tracked as distinct from mentorship, with senior leaders actively using their influence to advocate for specific women's advancement

We haven't distinguished between mentorship and sponsorship explicitly

Criteria are written to be neutral, though we haven't examined how they play out in practice

We're reasonably attentive to this, without a formal, structured check

Criteria and calibration processes are actively audited for patterns (language in reviews, who gets "stretch" opportunities, how ambition is read differently by gender), and adjusted based on what's found

Formal channels exist, though usage and trust in them vary

Reasonably safe, with some notable exceptions or gaps

Genuinely safe; concerns are raised through channels that are trusted, and handled with real consequence and follow-through, not just documentation

General awareness exists, without a structured, regular review process

Some metrics are tracked, though not reviewed with real consistency at senior levels

Representation metrics are tracked with the same discipline as financial or operational metrics, reviewed regularly at leadership or board level, with real accountability attached

We haven't formalised tracking of this specifically

Women hold senior titles, though cultural influence still tends to concentrate elsewhere

There's real, growing influence, though it's still uneven across the organisation

Women in senior roles are genuinely woven into how decisions get made and culture gets shaped, visibly and consistently, not just represented on an org chart

It's referenced in values and communications, without being formally tied to leader accountability

Some informal expectation exists, though it isn't consistently measured or rewarded

Advancing women's leadership is an explicit, measured part of how leaders themselves are evaluated, so it carries real consequence, not just aspiration

We haven't connected this to leader accountability yet

Q10. Is DEI, and specifically women's leadership advancement, tied to how leaders themselves are evaluated and rewarded, or does it live mainly in stated values?

Q9. How visible and influential are women in senior roles as active shapers of organisational culture, not just as individual title-holders?

Q8. Is progress on women's leadership representation tracked and reviewed with the same rigour as other business metrics, at the leadership or board level?

Q7. How safe and supported do women in your organisation feel raising concerns about bias, harassment, or exclusionary behaviour?

Q6. How confident are you that performance evaluation and promotion criteria are genuinely free of gendered bias in practice, not just on paper?

Q5. Beyond mentorship, do women in your organisation have genuine sponsors: senior leaders who actively advocate for them in rooms they aren't in?

Q4. How confident are you that pay is genuinely equitable for comparable roles and performance, regardless of gender?

Q3. How well do your policies support career continuity through life stages that disproportionately affect women's career trajectories (maternity leave, caregiving, career breaks)?

Women Leadership Inclusion Index

How Inclusive Is Your Leadership Pipeline for Women, Really?