Women Who Break Rules Shouldn’t Apologize

I had a call recently with another corporate leader. We had several similarities. We are both women leading organizations in the same era, industry, and with children of a similar age. We also shared a habit of apologizing for our unconventional leadership styles.

At several points in our conversation, I noticed both of us saying things like “I should be less in the weeds,” or “I shouldn’t be doing $25 an hour work.” These are so ingrained in our psyches as being the correct leadership choices because climbing the corporate ladder for us meant emulating a playbook we didn’t write. It’s usually when you arrive at the top of that ladder that you have agency to change the rules, but it can be hard to shake those old plays! After our conversation ended, I couldn't help but notice that we were apologizing for our advantages.

Let’s Challenge Tropes

I remember a time, in a leadership cohort, when a peer cautioned me against getting stuck in the weeds (or bogged down in details). During the not-so-distant shutdown of the world, while many competitors were in panic, our leadership team (made up of four women) walked into our offices and knew how to work all of its systems, including security, servers, and VoIP phone systems. Our office was quickly disassembled and reassembled remotely.  The paperless transaction management system we had painstakingly implemented one year earlier proved crucial in a market that quickly accelerated as people searched for larger spaces and recreational properties to retreat to. This is one example where a ground-level understanding of our systems gave our agents a competitive advantage.

The 'hire slow, fire fast' adage has many leaders struggling with a lack of human talent, high turnover, and increased HR costs. While I agree that this advice can be true in some situations, I can think of many organizations that could benefit from an investment in talent development and a realization that everybody wants to do good work. In an era where we swipe for the next partner, we can often take the fast and expensive method of disposing of the wrong fit, rather than investing in making our hiring decision right by successful onboarding, training and ongoing development.

The math is compelling—94% of surveyed employees responded that if a company invested in helping them learn, they would be more likely to stay longer. (Apollo Technical 2025)

When we break the conventional "fire fast" wisdom and instead invest in people, something remarkable happens. Organizations create environments where companies with a strong learning culture observed a 57% retention rate for employees compared to just 27% for those with moderate learning cultures. The difference is transformational. (LinkedIn Workplace Learning Report 2024)

Changing the approach

The leadership playbook tells us to stay at 30,000 feet, to delegate everything, and to maintain professional distance. But what happens when a crisis hits? What happens when your people need to know that you understand not just the vision, but the actual mechanics of making it work?

The same principle applies to talent management. The conventional wisdom of slow hiring and quicker firing treats people like interchangeable parts. People work in insecurity, fearing the next performance review. If given input from leadership in real time, employees would know that their leaders care about their professional growth. Employee and manager can be bonded then, in loyalty and mutual respect. Good companies retain a higher average of employees, not by following a playbook, but by recognizing that every employee wants to contribute meaningfully. How many more leadership plays should we question?

Breaking Rules, Opening Hearts

When we defend our "unconventional" leadership choices, maybe we're defending something more important than we realize. We may be defending our humanity in a business world that often asks us to check it at the door.  Perhaps, instead of trying to toughen up, we might embrace a nurturing leader. As I spoke to my new friend, I noticed a multitude of leadership qualities that I might emulate. These break the gender binary in the title of this piece (which I crafted to grab your attention). The truth is, we don’t want to discard the book entirely, but rather invite more voices to contribute to the rewrite. People of different ages, backgrounds, identities and perspectives.

What if getting into the weeds sometimes means you understand the landscape better than those who never leave their leadership towers? What if investing in people instead of discarding them creates the kind of organizational resilience that no number of "policy manuals" can buy? Because in a world where organizations are concerned about employee retention, leaders who approach the leadership playbook with creativity and discernment might have a competitive advantage!

I write and present my ideas, utilizing AI to assist with editing my grammar and spelling.