Women’s Corporate Board Placements Drop 33% as CEO Bias Grows

Corporate boardrooms are narrowing their search criteria in ways that systematically disadvantage women, with new placements for female directors falling 33 percent over the past year. The contraction reflects a sharp pivot by nominating committees back toward traditional chief executive and chief financial officer pedigrees, bypassing the broader C-suite roles where women have made recent gains.

Merline Saintil, cofounder of Black Women on Boards, identified the regression during Fortune’s Most Powerful Women Summit. Companies recruiting new directors are prioritizing active CEOs above other leadership profiles. Because women remain significantly underrepresented in the top corporate job—holding roughly 10 percent of Fortune 500 CEO positions as of recent counts—a strict CEO requirement mathematically shrinks the available female candidate pool before searches even begin.

This tightening of criteria arrives just as a new class of executives attempts to build full-time careers out of board service. Jane Bargmann, global managing partner at executive search firm Heidrick & Struggles, noted a growing trend of leaders leaving operating roles earlier to assemble portfolios of directorships across publicly traded companies and private equity firms. Some retired executives now maintain schedules as demanding as sitting chief executives, brokering deals and advising portfolio companies simultaneously.

Yet abandoning an operating role to chase board seats carries increasing risk. Hanneke Faber, CEO of Logitech, warned that nominating committees are actively filtering out candidates who have stepped away from day-to-day corporate management. Directors are expected to bring immediate, practical insight into rapid shifts like artificial intelligence integration, supply chain restructuring, and cybersecurity threats. Executives who left operational roles even two or three years ago often lack the current context boards demand. Faber emphasized that remaining embedded in the C-suite—where women hold more ground in functions such as human resources, legal, marketing, and technology—is essential for maintaining board viability.

The historical push for board diversity relied heavily on expanding definitions of relevant experience. Following the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent governance reforms, investors and proxy advisors pressured companies to recruit directors with specialized expertise rather than relying solely on former CEOs. That expansion opened doors for technologists, chief information officers, and other non-traditional leaders. The current retreat to CEO-only mandates effectively reverses a decade of progress in diversifying director skill sets.

Navigating this constrained environment requires deliberate relationship management. Annie Young-Scrivner, cofounder and CEO of private equity firm TwinPoint Collective, pointed to professional networks as the primary mechanism for securing appointments. During her tenure leading Wella Company, Young-Scrivner partnered with Heidrick & Struggles to rebuild the beauty brand’s board entirely with women, aligning governance with its predominantly female consumer base. She credited direct industry connections and expanded networking scopes for identifying qualified candidates outside traditional search pipelines.

Private equity continues to operate under different recruitment dynamics than public markets. PE-backed firms frequently prioritize functional operators—executives who have scaled specific business units or led digital transformations—over generalist CEOs. This sector remains one of the few areas where deep technical or operational expertise still outweighs the CEO title requirement, offering a critical pathway for women locked out of public company boards by the current hiring bias.

The 33 percent drop in placements signals that voluntary corporate diversity targets, which surged between 2020 and 2022, are losing momentum without regulatory enforcement. While states like California attempted to mandate gender and racial representation on boards headquartered within their borders, federal courts struck down key provisions of those laws, leaving governance largely to shareholder pressure and institutional investor guidelines. As major asset managers recalibrate their environmental, social, and governance frameworks amid political scrutiny, the external pressure forcing boards to look beyond sitting male CEOs has softened considerably.

For women currently serving in senior leadership, the immediate strategic imperative is maintaining operational relevance while aggressively cultivating relationships with search firms and incumbent directors. The window for transitioning from specialized C-suite roles to board seats has narrowed, demanding continuous visibility in the exact arenas where nominating committees are currently looking.