McKinsey director loses leadership roles after remarks on women CEOs

Chris Bradley, a senior partner at McKinsey, has lost his leadership roles at the firm’s research institute following comments he made on LinkedIn questioning the ‘glass cliff’ phenomenon affecting women CEOs.

McKinsey confirmed the decision on 11 October after a conduct review, according to the supplied report. Bradley remains a senior partner, while the firm said his public comments fell short of its expected standards.

The episode has renewed attention on the glass cliff, a theory examining whether women are more likely to be appointed to senior positions when organisations face poor performance or a crisis.

McKinsey cites conduct standards

Bradley, who is based in Australia, was among a small group of directors at the McKinsey Global Institute, the consulting firm’s business and economics research arm.

The firm said it had removed him from his leadership roles, including at the institute, following its review.

“Following our conduct review process, we have removed the partner from his leadership roles, including at the McKinsey Global Institute. His public comments fell well short of the standards we expect at our firm,” McKinsey spokesperson Taylor Burns said in a statement.

The firm did not announce the termination of Bradley’s senior partnership. His removal from leadership positions is the action confirmed in the supplied report.

The LinkedIn comments that triggered the controversy

The dispute began during a LinkedIn exchange about the glass cliff, after a friend of author Julia Carreon shared a post on the subject.

Bradley challenged the relevance of the theory, writing: “This theory is a very convenient way to always be a victim in the rain and empowered in the sunshine.”

He also questioned whether researching the phenomenon should be a priority, saying it did not rank “in the top 1,000 problems of the world”.

In another post, Bradley questioned whether women CEOs faced a distinct problem when appointed to difficult leadership positions.

“We once had a problem of female advancement to CEO (chief executive officer), but now we have a new problem that the jobs they get are too hard? Is this actually a thing?” he wrote.

The remarks drew criticism from people who viewed them as dismissive of the challenges women may face when leading struggling businesses. Bradley’s posts were later deleted, according to the supplied report.

What the glass cliff means for women leaders

The glass cliff describes a pattern in which women are appointed to leadership positions when an organisation is already experiencing difficulties, such as poor financial performance or a major crisis.

The concept differs from the glass ceiling, which refers to barriers that prevent women from reaching senior positions. The glass cliff focuses on the circumstances surrounding an appointment once a woman reaches the top.

The term was coined in 2005 by British psychologists Michelle K Ryan and Alexander Haslam of the University of Exeter. Their research examined FTSE 100 companies before and after women joined their boards, finding an association between the appointment of women and poor company performance in the preceding months.

The theory does not suggest every woman appointed during a crisis faces the same circumstances. Instead, it raises questions about whether some leaders inherit more challenging conditions and how their performance is subsequently assessed.

Why the debate matters for corporate leadership

Bradley’s comments have brought renewed attention to the circumstances in which organisations appoint women to their highest leadership positions.

The central question extends beyond representation alone: companies must also consider the condition of a business when a new leader takes charge, the challenges inherited and the expectations placed on them.

The glass cliff remains a theory about a pattern researchers have examined, rather than a rule applicable to every appointment. The controversy at McKinsey has placed the debate back in focus, while Bradley’s confirmed removal from leadership roles leaves his position as a senior partner unchanged.