Confidence is often treated as one of the most important ingredients for career success. Employees are encouraged to speak up, negotiate their salary, volunteer for challenging assignments and apply for promotions—even when they do not meet every requirement.
But confidence is not always judged equally.
In many workplaces, behaviour that makes one employee appear decisive and ambitious may cause another to be described as difficult, aggressive or overly demanding. This difference has helped create an ongoing conversation about the gender “confidence gap” at work.
Women are frequently advised to become more confident, promote their achievements and “lean in” to advance their careers. However, research suggests that the issue is more complicated. The perceived confidence gap may not simply be a personal weakness that women need to fix. Workplace structures, gender stereotypes, access to opportunities and the way confidence is rewarded can all affect career progression.
Here is what employees and employers need to understand.
The gender confidence gap describes the idea that women may be less likely than men to express confidence in their abilities, ask for opportunities or put themselves forward for senior positions.
At work, it may appear when an employee:
These behaviours can influence how an employee is perceived. In workplaces that reward visibility and self-promotion, quieter or more cautious employees may be overlooked even when their performance is strong.
However, describing this only as a lack of confidence can hide a much bigger issue.
There may be differences in how people express confidence, but confidence alone does not explain workplace inequality.
Australian research published in the Australian Journal of Labour Economics examined nationally representative data from 7,533 people. It found that a greater “hope for success” was associated with a higher likelihood of promotion—but only among men.
The study found no evidence supporting the common advice that women simply need to display more confidence to close workplace gender gaps.
This distinction matters.
A woman may be highly capable and confident, but her behaviour may not receive the same response or reward as similar behaviour from a male colleague. Encouraging women to speak more loudly does not solve a system that evaluates the same behaviour differently.
Confidence is the belief that you can perform a task. Competence is the knowledge, experience and ability required to perform it successfully.
The two qualities can exist independently.
A confident employee is not automatically the most capable person in the room. Similarly, an employee who communicates cautiously may still have outstanding knowledge and judgement.
Workplaces can make poor talent decisions when managers confuse visible confidence with leadership potential. Employees who speak first, dominate conversations or promote their achievements may receive more attention, while thoughtful and highly skilled employees are overlooked.
Recruitment and promotion decisions should therefore focus on evidence:
Confidence can support performance, but it should never replace proof of capability.
Confidence does not develop in isolation. It is affected by people’s experiences and the feedback they receive.
An employee who is regularly interrupted, excluded from decisions or passed over for meaningful assignments may begin to question whether their contribution is valued.
Women can also face contradictory expectations. They may be expected to demonstrate leadership but criticised for being too direct. They may be encouraged to negotiate but judged negatively when they do. They may be told to speak up while receiving less recognition when they contribute.
Over time, these repeated experiences can affect an employee’s willingness to take professional risks.
The Workplace Gender Equality Agency advises employers to examine gender bias throughout recruitment and promotion processes. This includes reviewing how job advertisements are written, how candidates are assessed and how managers identify leadership potential.
The confidence gap can begin before a candidate enters the workplace.
Some jobseekers may apply when they meet only part of a job’s selection criteria. Others may wait until they believe they meet nearly every requirement.
Job advertisements containing long lists of “essential” skills can unintentionally discourage capable candidates. This is especially true when employers combine genuine requirements with abilities that could easily be learned on the job.
For jobseekers, it is important to separate the requirements into three groups:
If you meet most of the important requirements and can demonstrate the ability to learn, consider applying. Employers rarely find a candidate who matches every preference perfectly.
Negotiating salary can feel uncomfortable for anyone, particularly when pay information is not openly available.
Employees may worry that asking for a higher salary will make them appear ungrateful or difficult. However, avoiding the conversation can affect not only current earnings but also future increases, superannuation and career opportunities.
The issue cannot be solved by telling women to negotiate more aggressively. Employers must also create transparent and consistent pay systems.
WGEA’s 2026 employer gender pay gap results cover approximately 5.9 million Australian workers. The agency reported that men remain 1.8 times more likely than women to be in the highest-paid group of employees, while women are 1.4 times more likely to be in the lowest-paid group.
More than half of employers also had a gender pay gap greater than 11.2% in favour of men.
These figures show why employers must review how starting salaries, bonuses, overtime and promotions are determined.
The gender confidence gap should not be treated as a problem that women must solve alone. Still, there are practical ways employees can make their contributions more visible.
Maintain a private document containing completed projects, positive feedback, performance results, new responsibilities and problems you have solved.
This evidence can support performance reviews, promotion applications and salary discussions.
Before a meeting or negotiation, write down your main points and the evidence supporting them. Preparation can make it easier to communicate confidently without feeling pressured to improvise.
You do not need to match every preferred requirement. If you meet the essential conditions and can explain your transferable skills, submit the application.
Mentors can provide advice, while sponsors can actively recommend you for opportunities. Professional networks can also help employees understand industry salaries, vacancies and career pathways.
Instead of asking, “How am I doing?” ask what skills or results you need to demonstrate to be considered for the next position.
Specific questions make it harder for decision-makers to respond with vague advice.
Recognising teamwork is valuable, but it should not erase your individual effort. Clearly explain your role in achieving a result using factual and professional language.
Confidence workshops alone will not create workplace equality. Employers must examine the systems that determine who receives visibility, support and advancement.
Employees should understand what experience, performance and skills are required for progression. Promotions should not depend primarily on who is most effective at self-promotion.
Remove unnecessary requirements and gender-coded language from job advertisements. Clearly distinguish essential criteria from preferred skills.
Ask candidates the same core questions and assess their answers against predetermined criteria. This helps prevent confidence, personality or similarity to the interviewer from outweighing competence.
Employers should review who receives major projects, acting leadership positions, training, client exposure and mentoring. These opportunities often determine who becomes ready for promotion.
Managers should understand how gender stereotypes can influence their interpretation of ambition, communication and leadership.
Clear salary ranges and structured remuneration reviews can reduce the pressure on individual employees to negotiate every improvement personally.
Confidence can help employees communicate their ideas, pursue opportunities and recover from setbacks. But it should not become a convenient explanation for unequal career outcomes.
The most useful question is not simply, “Why aren’t women more confident?”
Employers should also ask:
Whose confidence is encouraged, whose confidence is questioned and whose competence is being overlooked?
A fair workplace does not require every employee to communicate or lead in exactly the same way. It creates transparent systems that recognise performance, potential and contribution.
Women should be supported to pursue opportunities confidently—but organisations must ensure that confidence is evaluated fairly and backed by equal access to advancement.
For more workplace insights, Australian employment news and practical career guidance, visit CareerFinders.co and follow CareerFinders on LinkedIn.
Australian Journal of Labour Economics – Is Higher Confidence the Key to Women’s Career Advancement?
https://www.ajle.org/index.php/ajle_home/article/view/43
Workplace Gender Equality Agency – Gender-Equitable Recruitment and Promotion
https://www.wgea.gov.au/publications/gender-equitable-recruitment-and-promotion
WGEA – 2026 Australian Employer Gender Pay Gaps Report
https://www.wgea.gov.au/newsroom/2026-Australia-employer-gender-pay-gaps-report
WGEA – Gender Strategy Toolkit
https://www.wgea.gov.au/tools/gender-strategy-toolkit
Australian Human Rights Commission – Women in Male-Dominated Industries Toolkit
https://humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/document/publication/WIMDI_Toolkit_2013.pdf
