Challenges Faced by Female Leaders Through a Lens of a Western Hungarian Research

Abstract

In the global work culture of the 21st century, the image of female leaders is marginal. The stereotypical opinion links the terms leaders and managers to the male gender and predetermined gendered characteristics typical to men. The aim of this study is to redefine certain perspectives through empirical research based on previous literature regarding gender stereotypes in leadership and challenges facing female leaders. This paper looks at the main issues that concern female leaders throughout their careers and even after reaching a higher position and discusses the differences between male and female workers on the top levels of the organizational hierarchy. The research was conducted in the Western Transdanubia region of Hungary. The research was based on eight semi-structured interviews with mid- and senior managers, which were analyzed through thematic analysis to identify patterns and challenges. As an exploratory qualitative study with a region-specific sample, the findings provide valuable insights but should be interpreted cautiously as they cannot be extrapolated to a comparable situation. The findings of the study indicate that gender gaps in the corporate world can be attributed to the presence of stereotypes resulting from gender roles embedded in patriarchal societies, gender-based discrimination in the labor market. As the results suggest, these non-quantifiable problems are of great importance in terms of the position of women in the labor market and society.

1. Introduction

Organizations are heavily affected by social, environmental and economic change around the world, so adaptation is essential at both an individual and organizational level. Traditional models of chain of command are becoming less and less relevant, and transformation leadership, emotional intelligence, teamwork and cooperation are now increasingly needed [1,2,3].

This complex question is difficult to answer, but research is required to comprehend the mechanisms underlying the difficulties faced by female leaders at different stages of their careers. The need to be able to adjust to shifting environments and different organizational cultures is the primary cause of these dynamic global changes. How do gender roles, gender stereotypes, and the gendered labor market affect the career prospects of female leaders? While alternative work environments and programs, soft skills, and transformational leadership style are emerging as the new trend, traditional practices and leadership standards are becoming less relevant in today’s society and workplace culture.

For female workers in general, discrimination, stereotypes, and gender inequality have persisted for centuries: throughout history, women have been underrepresented in leadership roles within organizations and in political decision-making. However, putting women in higher positions has major strategic and financial benefits, additionally, having women participate in decision-making fosters constructive interpersonal relationships within a group or organization [2].

This paper aims to provide a concise overview of the gender dimension of leadership and the workplace. Then it discusses the advantages and disadvantages of having women in leadership positions and highlights the fundamental differences in the types and number of challenges that men and women face during their careers.

2. Theoretical Background

More cooperation is needed to overcome obstacles faced by women in their career progression. Only if an organization is able to change its perspective and overcome gender stereotypes and entrenched beliefs can it benefit from having a woman in charge. However, when men and women work well together, great results can be achieved, including better problem-solving, more effective communication and improved performance in general [3,4].

According to Surawicz [5], there are two categories of problems pertaining to female leaders: those resulting from unconscious bias and those that stem from organizational culture. While legal and cultural developments have made discrimination less obvious, there is growing awareness of how unconscious beliefs affect behavior on both an individual and group level [2].

In any case, it is undeniable that attitudes and stereotypes influence how we view other people. Rudman’s study [6,7] highlights the importance of social role theory. People consider women less suited to leadership positions and, because of their beliefs about how men and women are typically perceived, dismiss those who do not conform to gender stereotypes as being out of touch.

The idea that women are more emotional than men is a common stereotype in Western corporate culture. It is believed that women have a lower chance of achieving higher levels because they are unable to control how they express their emotions and how they influence their decisions in their professional lives. Another belief that has affected corporate and organizational culture is that women are less goal-oriented, less capable of taking and accepting critical feedback, and less capable of dealing with problems that affect subordinates and the company [8,9].

Two branches of gender bias in organizational culture are identified by the literature on stereotypes about female leaders: agency and communality. Although men are viewed as more agentic and women as more communal, leadership necessitates agency, according to implicit general beliefs. Women are therefore viewed as less capable of taking on leadership roles, but when they exhibit agentic behavior, it frequently sparks backlash. Women are less likely to be selected for specific roles or promotions because their agentic behavior is perceived as being overly dominant, as though they were violating the implicit rules of gender stereotypes. The difficulties female leaders encounter because of gender bias may not be adequately explained by communality and agency. Other qualities like stability, reason, toughness, and goal-orientedness are also necessary for effective leadership [8,10].

Distorted gender ratios over the centuries have caused male-dominance in corporate culture, especially in Western countries, as a result, men became the majority group that determines the nature of the relationship between themselves and minority groups, such as women. This imbalance constantly confirms and strengthens gender stereotypes and inequalities [3,11,12,13].

It is also thought that women with families are less committed to their work and therefore unable to give priority to the interests of society; however, modern societies with a progressive policy on work–life balance attract female employees and also have more women in management positions [12,14]

Due to a lack of networking, women frequently experience isolation even after achieving a leadership position. According to Davies-Netzley [15], Bierema [16], Tremmel and Wahl [17], women frequently have to play by men’s rules at work, which makes them less assertive and unable to express their opinions clearly. They are more likely to remain silent about disagreements in specific decision-making situations. Hiring and promotion decisions in organizations are often influenced by gender bias, which limits the mobility of women. It is called elitism, and it is a major feature of the modern corporate culture. According to Cook and Glass [18], male candidates are preferred, especially for high-level positions, because they are considered more important in the organization.

Organizations have a great influence on stereotypes and their effects because they set standards for their cultures. Apart from promoting stereotypes, unequal job preferences and privileges for men and women may reinforce gender-specific attitudes in the workplace, for example, promoting female career development can easily lead to conflicting views among employees [19,20].

Few or no women are recruited during the recruitment process, where the selection criteria are mainly based on stereotyped male characteristics. Conversely, women are preferred when the criteria include more feminine qualities; moreover, regardless of the gender of the decision-makers, the same trend continues. This phenomenon is referred to as homosocial reproduction [20,21].

Gender inequality tendencies can be successfully overcome, though, by certain organizational procedures and methods: women’s mobility is boosted by gender diversity and the presence of female leaders, while male preferences in hiring and promotion procedures are diminished. Gender stereotypes can be lessened and male-to-male preferences can be avoided by integrating women into senior roles. The likelihood of negative evaluation bias decreases as more women rise to the top [18].

The two genders must have had equal representation in leadership roles if men and women possess the same amount of innate talent, which is untrue. The implication of this is that women are less likely than men to succeed [19].

The term glass ceiling refers to the invisible social and organizational barriers that detain women from obtaining into high-level positions in organizations. The phenomenon is not only bias-centered but also correlates with organizational culture and structure [22].

Invisible obstacles result from gender categorization and stereotypes, which make women perceived as less capable leaders. As a result of homosocialization, female workers have limited access to professional networking, support and confidential information, which are crucial for mobility and career development [23].

Considering previous research [2,17,22], women are more likely to be promoted to leadership positions in companies that are struggling, in crisis, or facing bankruptcy. Research findings also showed that low-performing companies have a disproportionate number of women in leadership positions; moreover, companies that hire women for leadership positions frequently see a drop in performance prior to promotion. According to Ashby [24], Cook and Glass [12], Cohen et al. [18], Oferman and Foley [2], this phenomenon is known as the glass cliff.

It is important that the relative success and welfare of an organization are correlated to the perception of effective management. Women are perceived as more valuable in struggling organizations because of gender stereotypes, which include the belief that they are more emotionally sensitive, better problem-solvers, more capable of accepting failure, and have better interpersonal skills. The glass ceiling is less common in firms that have implemented policies requiring women to hold senior management positions and more common in firms with a history of male management [2,18,23].

Although the labor market situation of female managers in Hungary has improved over the last decades, career opportunities for women continue to vary countrywide. Both during and after reaching higher positions, female employees are more likely to face difficulties [24,25].

However, there have been no significant changes in the representation of female managers, especially in large organizations, although it is now easier to reach management positions. Ilyés and Lőrincz [25] argue that the number of women at the top of a company decreases with its size and the level of the hierarchy observed. The percentage of women shows a decreasing trend as one progresses in the hierarchy of the organization. Examining companies and enterprises, Kozma and Györpál [24] have pointed out that women are significantly underrepresented at the head of companies. In Hungary, the number of women in the boards of large and SMEs is low, with a female share of 31 percent in large and SMEs. As far as female and male entrepreneurs are concerned, the female presence is almost 40 percent, which is higher than the female presence in senior positions. The authors also state that as the company size increases, the number of female executives decreases, which is in line with the conclusion drawn by Ilyes and Lőrincz [25]. Based on the reviewed literature and previous Hungarian research, the Hungarian context is identical to the previously examined theories [2,12,18,24,25].

3. Materials and Methods

The aim of the research was to identify and capture gender stereotypes in leadership, and to reveal the effect of explicit and implicit bias on the careers of female leaders. In order to examine the content, context and effect of gender stereotypes, a subtle approach was needed.

To achieve research goals, eight interviews were carried out with employees, both women and men, working in middle management and/or managerial positions in companies and institutions operating in the Western Transdanubia region of Hungary.

A semi-structured interview technique with a small sample may provide data for a deeper understanding of the phenomenon in a research context. The study is made more effective by pre-planned topics and questions, and the interactive interview format allows for flexibility to learn from the views and experiences of interviewees [26,27].

A structured recruitment and selection process has been followed to ensure methodological transparency. Potential participants were initially contacted through professional and institutional networks, complemented by targeted e-mail invitations via business and university alliances in western Hungary. Of the 22 individuals invited, 14 replied positively to the screening phase and 6 withdrew due to insufficient time or lack of willingness to participate. After applying the inclusion criteria (minimum five years of leadership or management experience, current or previous senior level or senior-level role and active employment in a company or institution) eight participants were enrolled. The exclusion criteria were less than five years of relevant experience, no formal management responsibility or a lack of informed consent. The overall rate of non-response and refusal was therefore 36 percent (8 out of 22 enrolled). This transparent flow of invited, screened, registered and disqualified participants reduces selection bias and enhances the transferability of findings to similar organizational contexts in the region.

Efforts were made to ensure diversity across the different sectors, with interviewees from areas such as finance, HR, education and IT. In addition, participants have been selected to reflect a wide age range ranging from 30 to 60 years in order to capture a wide range of experiences related to both career stages and generational contexts. Data on participants are provided in Appendix B.

The sample size of eight participants was considered adequate for the qualitative design of the study, as it allowed for a thorough engagement with the individual career paths and while still ensuring diversity across sectors and age groups. Although the study did not aim at statistical representativity, the recurrent themes showed a degree of thematic saturation sufficient to capture the main issues relevant to the research. Therefore, findings should be seen as context-specific findings that can be transferred to similar organizational and regional environments, rather than as generalizations.

Before the interviews, participants were given detailed information on the purpose of the study, the voluntary nature of the participation and the use of data. Respondents were informed of their rights and of their anonymity and were given the opportunity to withdraw at any time without further questions being asked. Only respondents who indicated that they had work experience at the beginning of the interview were included in the sample. All interviews were conducted in Hungarian and recorded with the oral and written consent of the interviewees (see Appendix A). The participants were explicitly informed that the recordings would be used for research purposes only and that their anonymity would be fully protected. No identifying information was included in the transcripts or analysis. The research was in accordance with institutional ethical standards and did not require formal approval by the university ethics committee, as per internal guidelines.

The analytical process was based on the six stages of the thematic analysis developed by Braun and Clarke [28]. First, the transcripts were read through several times for familiarity, followed by open coding, with meaningful units highlighted and labeled. These initial codes were then grouped into wider categories by means of axial coding, which allowed for the emergence of recurring patterns among the participants. In the following phase, the categories were refined to preliminary topics by comparing codes for internal and external homogeneity. The themes were then cross-checked with the data set to ensure that they accurately reflected the participant accounts and then clearly defined with brief labels and boundaries. Two researchers independently coded the first set of interviews, compared interpretations, and debated inconsistencies until they came to a consensus. After the coding logic was agreed, the remaining conversations were coded in cooperation to ensure consistency of interpretation. In line with the Braun and Clarke guidelines, formal intercoding reliability statistics were not used due to the reflective and interpretative focus of the study, but reliability was enhanced by joint coding sessions and iterative discussion. The researchers reviewed the interview notes several times and found recurrent thoughts and statements. These themes were developed inductively and refined by cross-referencing them with relevant findings in the peer-reviewed literature. This process of note-taking, coding and summarizing ensured that the final analysis was based both on the participants’ point of view and on the theoretical basis of the proposal. This process relied on a manual interpretation and reflection to gather insights and patterns from the dialog. Given the relatively small volume of data, manual coding was considered appropriate and sufficient for capturing patterns in line with the exploratory purpose of the study. No software tools were used.

Researchers were female academics with previous experience in gender studies and organizational analysis, which may have influenced the rapporteurs’ and the data interpretation. Therefore, reflexive note-taking and joint discussions have been used to critically review assumptions and ensure transparency in the analysis process.

The original style of the participants was maintained during the analysis and the development of the findings.

A brief introductory paragraph was also included at the beginning of the interview guide (see Appendix A), informing the participants that the interview would be recorded with their consent, maintaining anonymity and that the data would be used exclusively for academic research purposes. The participants were also given the right to withdraw from the interview at any time or to refuse to answer any questions without prejudice to the outcome.

Interview questions (see Appendix A) focused mainly on issues identified in the literature: gender stereotypes, prejudices and their impact on women’s careers.

Each interview took on average 40 min.

The facts and issues discovered during the analysis of literature served as the foundation for the formulation of the research questions.

RQ1: Does gender-based discrimination in the workplace stem from societal gender stereotypes?

RQ2: What barriers do female leaders encounter both before and after shattering the glass ceiling?

4. Findings and Discussion

4.1. Traditional Gender Roles and Family Roles

Deeply rooted traditional gender roles continue to influence women’s career paths. Five female respondents noted that balancing domestic and professional responsibilities remains a central challenge: they always feel that they must be working twice as hard at work and still be able to look after their family at home. This double burden echoes findings by Tremmel and Wahl [17] that traditional expectations persist despite progress in workplace equality.

Respondents had generally consistent views on the relationship between traditional gender roles and traditional family roles and career paths for women. One argues that career prospects for women are largely determined by their sense of purpose, ingenuity, character traits, and openness to learning and growth, with gender roles having only a secondary influence. The fact that the respondent is a woman, the youngest respondent, has run her own company since she was 20 years old and has extensive experience in the labor market should be emphasized. Five women interviewed underlined that women are burdened by pressure to take responsibility for their domestic and professional roles and agreed that social gender norms hinder female professional development in comparison to male workers, which is consistent with the results of the Tremmel and Wahl study [17]. One respondent, who was in his 40s and working in senior management, described the problems he had encountered despite being over 40.

Younger participants showed more resistance to traditional roles. “For me, my ambition defines my success more than my gender does—but I still feel judged when I prioritize my business over family expectations,” a 27-year-old participant said. This highlights a significant shift but also indicates that social norms continue to shape women’s choices [5,14,29].

Male respondents suggested that societal expectations often penalize women for career ambition, particularly around family formation. “Hiring managers worry about maternity leave before they consider her skills,” one senior manager said. This aligns with Eagly and Karau’s theory of role congruity, which explains how conflict arises when women’s career goals clash with stereotypical family roles.

4.2. Stereotypes and Bias in Recruitment and Promotion

Both male and female respondents highlighted the overall pattern that emerges from socialization, which also influences how they view their role in family life, the workplace and gender, as highlighted in two previous studies [2,7]. One male respondent highlighted how attitudes to work, housing and family formation have changed significantly and continue to do so, including the loosening of social norms and traditional roles. In his reply, he discussed a problem that he has repeatedly encountered in the labor market: that women are less competitive than men in hiring. Due to the perception that planning a pregnancy or a family makes women vulnerable, employers find women less attractive. The lower levels of the organization are less likely to experience this phenomenon, while the middle and upper levels are more likely to do so. The results obtained from male respondents illustrate those obtained from earlier research [3,18,20].

Stereotypes in recruitment and promotion processes were consistently reported across participants. Interviewees described how certain jobs were implicitly coded as male roles. “Some colleagues told me I must have gotten it because I’m good with people, not because of my management skills,” she said. This suggests the presence of the stereotype that women are better suited to emotional labor but are less suited to strategic leadership [9,12].

Interviewees consistently replied in the affirmative when asked whether social stereotypes affect the status of women in the labor market today. Stereotypes about the appropriateness of women and their decision-making skills were mentioned in the majority of replies: female respondents reported several instances of employers explicitly favoring male applicants for a particular job and citing the nature of the job as a reason why they believed that women were less qualified. Further experience indicates that women are stereotyped in middle and senior management positions, mainly due to their ability to carry burdens, be flexible and take decisions. The most common stereotypes about female managers are lack of resolution, overly emotional decision-making, and poor negotiation skills. Depending on the content of the interviews, pre-judice against women may also be linked to the fact that they have children: employers take account of women who have children [4,8,21].

Respondents were particularly focused on developing the masculine characteristics that are expected of female leaders when asked about the challenges they face in taking on leadership. The answers are consistent with the issues raised in three recent international and Hungarian studies [17,18,30], which holds that leadership requires traits and competences that are considered masculine by stereotypical labor market thinking. As a result, women leaders try to learn and embrace them to meet the expectations placed upon them, which leads to a different pattern of behavior; however, a model that minimizes positive attributes of women hinders the development of female leadership styles and reinforces the perpetuation of gender stereotypes [10,31,32].

A 30–40-year-old female manager interviewed had previously worked with 200 subordinates in senior management positions in the hotel sector. According to her experience, there are many stereotypes about women in the business life: as a senior manager, she was often the subject of comments about her age and appearance and was also reprimanded on numerous occasions for her leadership and competence. As they move up the corporate ladder, male interviewees reported fewer women in their workplace (both interviewed are employed by large corporations). Respondents believe this is due to the derogatory stereotype of women, which is that they are less able to use their abilities, too sentimental, irrational and unable to make proper decisions in emergencies. In their responses, one male and two female respondents underlined the urgent need to eliminate gender stereotypes in the workplace

In heavy industry, female managers are still perceived as an anomaly. A male interviewee from the heavy industry sector highlighted that there are very few women in managerial positions at his company, particularly one woman in a top leader position. “People still say she’s ‘soft’ on staff and not decisive enough. Such remarks are consistent with Rudman et al.’s findings that agentic women face backlash for defying gender norms.

Male interviewees have indirectly encountered discrimination at work, but they have not personally experienced it throughout their careers. They all agree that businesses should highlight the positive traits and skills of women in order to reduce gender-based discrimination, enhancing workplace diversity and boosting organizational effectiveness. According to the literature, the answers illustrate similarities to those analyzed in earlier studies [17].

Moreover, several respondents noted the “glass cliff” phenomenon, where women are promoted during organizational crises. “They call a woman when things go wrong, but they don’t trust her to lead during good times.” This paradox not only limits women’s opportunities but also places them in precarious situations [18,33].

Although they have not personally experienced it, two women interviewed agreed that female leaders can face challenges before and after taking office. One female respondent works for an international company owned by non-nationals and indicates that the organization is more sensitive to gender issues and therefore has no gender stereotypes. Male respondents took a different approach in answering the question, focusing on stereotypes about women leaders in heavy industry and especially in the food industry. This is reflected in the focus on specific female characteristics as risk factors, such as greater empathy, less logical decision-making and a perceived lack of fault. Each of my respondents agreed that the percentage of female executives decreases as one climbs the corporate ladder. All but two respondents experienced this phenomenon at work, especially the impact of the glass ceiling and the problem statement in peer-reviewed literature [2,17,18,22,24,33,34,35].

4.3. Leadership Challenges Above the Glass Ceiling

In their answers regarding potential barriers that women leaders may face both before and after the glass ceiling, four of the female interviewees went into great detail about their individual experiences. According to them, they had challenges prior to assuming a leadership role that were inexplicable by reason. The stereotyping of women based on their traits and skills and the ensuing devaluation were the most prevalent topics in the discussions. As they ascended the organizational ladder, all of the female managers interviewed reported feeling less and less appreciated and having to prove themselves more than their male counterparts, which frequently required more effort and time.

While breaking through glass ceilings is rare, staying above it poses further challenges. Four of the eight respondents described subtle but persistent undermining from colleagues. “I realized that I needed to show my worth at every meeting,” said a mid-level manager in real estate. My male peers do not.” This constant need for validation aligns with Heilman and Okimoto’s observations on the implied communality deficit.

Additionally, women leaders often feel compelled to adopt behaviors that are stereotyped as masculine. Female respondents admitted that being too kind makes people question their authority as a leader. Such situations can lead to conflicts of identity, role conflicts and stress. Women adopting an agentic style risk backlash for being “too aggressive” [6]. Homosexual reproduction [21]—where senior male leaders mentor and promote people like themselves—also emerged from the responses. Three female interviewees stated that important decisions are still being made on tables they are not invited to. This informal exclusion illustrates women being limited from networks critical for career advancement [15,16].

4.4. Coping Strategies and Ways Forward

Despite the obstacles, the interviews also revealed coping strategies. Some women seek mentors outside their workplace. Four female respondents mentioned having other female leaders as mentors, in most cases at other companies, helping them with certain challenges they face. This is in line with recent calls in the literature for cross-organizational networks to support women’s leadership development [4,17].

Another strategy is to reshape leadership styles to integrate both communal and agentic characteristics. A young female interviewee highlighted her belief that empathy is a strength, not a weakness, however, and it takes excellent soft skills to lead a team with care and be able to be clear and decisive when necessary. This is in line with emerging views on relational leadership ethics [11].

It is crucial to highlight interviewees experiences with employer attitudes, which demonstrate that businesses do not give enough attention to encouraging highly skilled, female employees and supporting their professional growth [29,30]. Respondents focused primarily on developing the masculine traits expected of female leaders when discussing the challenges they faced after assuming a leadership role. The responses are in line with the issues presented in two recent international and Hungarian studies [19], which hold that leadership calls for traits and skills deemed masculine by the labor market’s stereotypical thinking. Because of this, female leaders attempt to learn and adopt these in order to live up to the expectations that are placed on them, which results in a different pattern of behavior. The pattern that minimizes the positive attributes of women, however, impedes the growth of female leadership styles and encourages the persistence of stereotypes about female leaders [18].

The need for structural change was also highlighted by respondents. Organizations need to change their culture, one senior manager said. Policy recommendations include bias training, transparent promotion criteria, and institutional support for work–life balance practices shown to improve gender equity [20,22].

Overall, the findings confirm that gendered expectations, stereotypes, and structural barriers remain persistent challenges for female leaders in Western Hungary. Yet they also point to possibilities for resilience, allyship, and cultural change.

5. Conclusions

The study has explored the challenges facing women leaders in the western Transdanubian region of Hungary and highlighted how gender stereotypes, structural barriers and traditional social roles continue to shape the professional opportunities of women. The findings suggest that women managers face persistent bias in recruitment, promotion and management practices, but also highlight strategies for resilience, mentoring and cultural change. The qualitative and exploratory nature of the research, based on eight semi-structured interviews, means that the findings should not be generalized beyond the studied context. Instead, they should be interpreted as context-specific insights that hold potential transferability to similar organizational and regional environments.

Gender gaps in the labor market can be attributed to the existence of stereotypes in a patriarchal society, discrimination based on gender, the difficulties experienced by female employees and their limited career opportunities as managers. The study findings indicate the importance of these issues for the status of women in the labor market and society, although they can hardly be quantified.

The analysis indicates that women managers face persistent bias in recruitment, promotion and management practices, but also identified coping strategies such as resilience, mentoring and integration of collaborative and team-based management. These findings highlight the persistence of gendered expectations in the workplace, as well as the path to cultural change.

The impact of gender stereotypes in the workplace is likely to be lessened due to the faster pace of social change, the changing balance between national and international aspects, and the associated effects of multiculturalism. The social roles of men and women must be redefined to cope with the new conflicts and tensions that are emerging in everyday life and in the world of business. However, organizations and individuals of both sexes must be sensitive, empathetic, accepting and willing to make concessions in order to make changes that will have an impact on gender inequality.

The findings of this study suggest a number of practical implications for policy makers and organizations seeking to promote a gender-inclusive and sustainable culture of leadership. Organizations should establish formal recognition systems for emotional work and relational tasks, as participants consistently describe their involvement in invisible work, such as motivating colleagues, diffusing conflict, and promoting team spirit, which is still undervalued in traditional appraisal of leadership. Reformation of promotion procedures can reduce informal bias. The respondents stressed that access to leadership often depends on informal networks and implicit expectations that privilege traditionally male standards. Transparent and values-based evaluation frameworks help ensure equal access to leadership. The values-based approaches to leadership that the women highlighted during interviews—such as empathy, cooperation and long-term thinking—should be incorporated into organizational leadership development programs. These qualities are not only essential for inclusive governance, but also closely aligned with the principles of organizational sustainability. In addition, organizations can promote mentoring structures and internal support communities for women professionals, especially those going through leadership transitions, as highlighted by participants. Finally, integrating gender equality indicators into corporate sustainability strategies can have positive outcomes. Although many institutions refer to sustainability, participants noted that gender mainstreaming is often marginalized or hidden within the human resources. Gender-sensitive metrics in sustainability reporting and planning can ensure a more holistic and socially inclusive approach to long-term organizational development.

The results indicate the reasons for discrimination against women in the various organizational decisions and the problems they face in being promoted within organizations. The results suggest that gender is a factor that profoundly shapes how people perceive the world. Socialization and the gender roles we unconsciously adopt can make it difficult to transcend this stigma.

At the same time, the limitations of the study—including its small sample size, the regional scope of western Hungary and its focus on particular organizational sectors—mean that the conclusions are tentative. Future research should address these limitations by examining larger sample sizes, triangulating interviews with organizational documents or other data sources, and carrying out comparative studies in the different Hungarian regions and in the international context. This work would allow a more comprehensive assessment of how structural gender barriers manifest themselves in diverse labor market environments and test the applicability of the issues identified here.

6. Limitations

The first constraint relates to theoretical saturation. Due to the relatively small sample size of only eight interviews, full coverage has not been reached. While patterns of repetition in traditional gender roles, stereotypes in recruitment and glass ceiling challenges have been identified, some areas—such as coping strategies and intergenerational differences in leadership perceptions—remain potentially open and merit further investigation. The main objective of this exploratory study was to identify key issues and highlight overlooked dynamics rather than to provide a comprehensive overview. Future research with a larger and more diverse pool of participants would allow for greater saturation, thus increasing the completeness and transferability of the findings. As such, it is a stepping stone to a larger future research project, building on the knowledge gathered during the current research. The authors plan to extend the study by including a larger and more diverse sample to allow for a more comparative analysis and more generalization. The results obtained so far provide a valuable input for such future empirical and theoretical developments.

The geographical scope of the research was intentionally limited to western Hungary, and it was aimed specifically at women in leadership positions operating in the economic and institutional environment of the western Transdanubian region. The decision was not only pragmatic in view of the location of the authors and the availability of participants, but also conceptually based on the strategic orientation of Széchenyi István University. As a regional knowledge center located in Győr, the university emphasizes applied research and social responsibility in its third mission, which is to focus on involvement in the surrounding socio-economic environment. Research in this geographical area is in line with the wider objective of the university to contribute to the development of regional human capital, in particular by generating evidence-based insights that inform policy and organizational practice.

This embedding increases the practical relevance of the findings for local institutions, businesses and public sector players, particularly in view of Hungary’s ongoing efforts to localize the SDGs and increase the participation of women in the leadership. However, this also poses a limitation in terms of the universality of the results. In other Hungarian regions and in international contexts, the culture of leadership, gender norms and sustainability practices may differ significantly. The patterns identified in the research—such as emotional work, informal barriers and values of sustainable management—may be different in areas with alternative organizational structures or social policy environments. Therefore, future research should aim at including cross-regional or cross-country comparisons to confirm and enrich the conclusions of this localized qualitative survey.

Another limitation relates to the use of secondary data. The study draws on previous Hungarian research on the female leadership ratio, as more recent national statistics were not available at the time of the research. This limits the possibility to compare the findings of the interviews with fully current national trends. Therefore, future studies should include existing statistical data to improve the contextualization of the qualitative findings.

Finally, validation is another constraint. In this study, neither the member checks with the participants nor the triangulation with the organizational documents was performed. This decision was deliberate, as the research was conceived as an exploratory, small-scale qualitative survey, where anonymity was ensured and candid reflections were captured. However, the lack of such validation strategies means that the credibility of the interpretation depends mainly on the researchers’ reflexive engagement and systematic thematic analysis. Although the credibility has been enhanced by repeated transcript review, reflexive note-taking and collaborative discussion among coders, future studies should use participant validation and triangulation to increase the confirmability and reliability of results.