There are countless initiativesdesigned to address workplace gender equality—those that try to attract women to certain professionsand roles where they are under-represented, those that try to support women's career trajectories, and thethose that try to retain women in the workforce. While the impetus behind these initiatives is generallypositive, many of these interventions are not based on evidence, in terms of their design, their implemen-tation or in the evaluation of their efficacy.

But the evidence is very clear on thispoint—it is not women that need fixing, but the deeply entrenched systems of gender inequality thatstructure our organizations and structure society more broadly

Similarly, work by Meeussen et al. (2022) demonstrate than in male-dominated careers, such as surgeryand the veterinary profession, women (compared to men) report less career engagement because of theirmore frequent experiences of gender discrimination and lower perceived fit with those higher up thecareer ladder.

Rather than putting the onus on employees, particularlywomen, to overcome their own impostor feelings—being more confident and ‘faking it until you makeit’—we need to implement more systemic approaches, creating cultures where colleagues are valued andtreated with respect.

memetic advice such as ‘if you are offered a seat on a rocket ship, do not askwhat seat, just get on’ and ‘fortune does favour the bold, and you never know what you are capable of ifyou do not try’

However,when we looked at actual experiences of risk taking in the workplace—such as taking on a difficult task,speaking up or quitting your job for a new job—men reported more positive consequences for takingrisks than women, and as a result, anticipated having a greater likelihood of taking the same risks in thefuture.

Vets with managerial responsibilities evaluated a male vet as morecompetent and suggested paying him 8 per cent more than an equally qualified female vet.

What is most troublesome about the one size fits all approach, is that gender interventions and initi-atives are most often based on the experiences of the dominant group—such as those women who arewhite, middle-class or straight. This is problematic, both because the experiences of such women are byno means universal, and because women not included in this group—for example culturally and linguis-tically diverse women, working-class women, and LGBTQI+ women and gender diverse people, oftenface the greatest inequalities.

Catering for just one group of womenis unhelpful, particularly if that group of women as a whole are likely to experience less disadvantage.Interventions need to overtly address the issues faced by all women, not just those in the majority or thosewith the most privilege

here is still much to be done in acknowledging other intersectionalidentities, such as those based on age, class, disability and sexuality.

Taken together, while the evidence shows us that there have clearly been missteps on the way, theevidence also demonstrates that social psychology is in an excellent position to play an important role aswe stride forward towards gender equality.