In the lead up to this international women’s day, have you noticed just how many discussions, posts, articles, self help courses, books and corporate workshops are about the perils of imposter syndrome?
Whilst both imposter syndrome and tall poppy syndrome have been associated with leadership, it seems that in recent years there has been an exponentially growing recognition of the impact that imposter syndrome can have on female leadership, while tall poppy syndrome continues to remain a somewhat more taboo subject.
Imposter syndrome is a psychological phenomenon where an individual doubts their accomplishments and has a persistent fear of being exposed as a fraud. It’s been found to be particularly prevalent among high-achieving women, who feel that they have only achieved their success through luck or deceit, rather than their efforts and abilities. The impact of this is then said to lead to self-doubt, anxiety, and a reluctance to take on leadership roles.
Tall poppy syndrome on the other hand, is a concept used to describe a cultural attitude that is a level of hostility towards those who are high achievers or those who stand out from the crowd for their exceptionalism. It’s often used as a way of undermining female leaders, who may be seen as threatening or encroaching on established power bases.
In the lead up to this international women’s day, rather than continuing to mindlessly repeat the same, worn-out, comfortable rhetoric, of how “terrible” imposter syndrome is and how we must do all that we can to eradicate it from our corporate personas, shouldn’t we take a closer look at the harsher truth? Wouldn’t it be far more relevant, not to mention interesting, to look at why imposter syndrome seems to be more professionally acceptable that tall poppy syndrome? Or to understand how it seems to have gained much greater traction and acceptance as “the legitimate obstacle” to female leadership advancement, when compared to the equally hindering tall poppy syndrome?
We thought it would, so we did. We thought we’d take a moment to analyse what seems to be an apparent “attitude disparity” towards two conditions that are the very reasons for the widespread gender disparity itself. Deep, right?
Imposter syndrome is often framed as an internal psychological condition that’s characterised by self doubt and the irrational fear of being exposed as a fraud despite the obvious success of an individual. What framing it in this way does though, is that it makes it a much more palatable topic to discuss in professional circles, because it aligns neatly with the prevailing ideals of many organisations. Rather than confronting the systemic biases and cultural norms that might actually be hindering female leaders’ advancement within organisations and across industries, the tendency for blaming “the individual” (often a female individual), for the problem seems far more easier to accept. If you think about it, this inherent tendency itself, is a more obvious and clear reflection of the continued ingrained biases that continue to pervade our sector and within our societal fabric.
The explanation that, were it not for a ‘psychological inadequacy’ of an individual, professional success in the workplace would of course be determined by an individual’s talent and effort (since we’re a meritocratic society), is a far more appealing reason to uphold. This explanation allows organisations to avoid examining the truth of their own potentially biased structures and practices. By claiming that organisations stand ready and willing to address the issue of imposter syndrome through the various workshops and training programs on self-confidence, assertiveness etc, by targeting the inadequacies of an individual, corporate systems can blissfully continue to avoid confronting a problem that would otherwise be far more difficult to manage.
This is because tall poppy syndrome is unpalatable, and often unconsciously (or quite consciously) actively resisted within professional cultures, because it directly challenges organisational and societal norms. Even the mere suggestion that a significant barrier for women’s advancement could be due to the external system that has nothing to do with the individual, and the implication that our modern professional workplaces could possibly be responsible for such responses as resentment, envy and backlash inflicted on successful women in this day and age, is far too unappealing.
Discussing tall poppy syndrome would require acknowledging some very uncomfortable and confronting truths about envy, the persistence of traditional gender roles in corporate cultures and the ways in which women’s ambitions still continue to be strictly monitored by society. This is because it would force a deeper examination of the systemic and organisational deficiencies that underpin our very cultural foundations, and therefore is wholly unpopular and seen as being way too hard to address than setting up some seminars on developing self confidence.
Another reason for the disparity in acceptance that’s observed between what are two equally significant barriers to female empowerment and leadership advancement, is the perception of what it might mean for the optics and reputation of an organisation’s performance and image. Allowing investments in programs aimed to combat imposter syndrome is often easier to justify, because it sits better with the rhetoric that by filling gender quotas on boards and such, companies are supposedly practicing inclusion, diversifying their thinking, increasing their productivity and improving company profitability. Therefore, addressing imposter syndrome is seen as a win-win for both the individual and the organisation.
In stark contrast to this, even acknowledging, let alone combating tall poppy syndrome, can be perceived as dangerous and potentially damaging to organisational cohesion and professional reputation, as it would risk creating a negative image of an organisation’s corporate culture. Since organisational systems now face significant pressure to demonstrate at least a façade of equal opportunity and meritocracy in the modern world, we can all certainly understand why there would be a reluctance to openly address tall poppy syndrome.
Further, the language used to describe the two concepts can also play a crucial role in their levels of seeming acceptance. Imposter syndrome is more legitimised as it is often presented as a diagnostic, temporary, psychological blip, for which professional help can be sought and the issue can be remedied. The language of “tall poppy syndrome” and “being cut down” however, has far more judgemental connotations and can evoke imagery of envy, malice and spite, which are uncomfortable to acknowledge and unpalatable to address as a politically correct topic in progressive societies.
Finally, the level of attention and visibility surrounding imposter syndrome, where prominent female leaders have openly admitted their experiences with it, together with the multitude of books, articles and workshops dedicated to managing it, has helped to normalise it in the arena of public opinion. Whilst tall poppy syndrome has also been discussed in academic circles and media, due to it’s more complex and politically charged nature, and the much greater potential for backlash against those who call it out, it has obviously not received the same level of attention, support or advocacy.
In fact, it’s interesting to recall that women who’ve written about the reality of tall poppy syndrome in workplaces, claim to have often received a tremendous outpouring of support and gratitude for “being brave” in having raised the issue. Ironically though, a far greater proportion of these messages seem to have been sent to them via private correspondence, as opposed to publicly acknowledging their contributions in popular forums. Unfortunately, it is far too easy to stay silent and pretend that we don’t see the issues which are too confronting, too uncomfortable, or that may too closely resonate with our own personal experiences, especially if it means doing so would be at the risk of going against more ‘politically correct’ opinions.
The overall greater acceptance of imposter syndrome being the major barrier to female leadership advancement therefore can stem from a number of different factors, and will very likely continue to persist for some years to come. At least until we, as a society work up the collective courage to dare to take a real look under the hood without fearing what we may find.
So on this 2025 international women’s day, we at AIHE, put to you the challenge to pause, to take a moment to really observe the rhetoric we see and hear around us, and to reflect on our own roles in perhaps unconsciously propagating a continued sense of female disempowerment. We encourage each individual currently in leadership positions across the healthcare industry, male and female alike, to shift your mindset from continuing to mindlessly uphold the ‘PC opinions‘, and instead to channel your inner courage and dare to take a step outside the box. Only then will we as healthcare leaders, and as a professional industry, truly be able to acknowledge and confront the real barriers that continue to keep women trapped under glass ceilings.
We dare to ask the tricky questions and challenge the status quo -so that you don’t have to! AIHE.
Follow us on LinkedIn to stay ahead of the curve, with regular expert insights.
Visit aihexec.com/events to register for our upcoming programs.