Women on the stage: influence, representation and the future of Europe

5 min read

Democracy thrives when women are not just present, but presenting. Not just in the room, but at the table. Not just in the audience, but on the stage. We all agree on the theory. And yet, here we are in 2026, still in a world in which slogans are proclaimed loudly, but actions often remain modest. Where theory is celebrated, but practice all too often ignored.

The Davos and Brussels disconnect

This year in Davos, deliberations once again highlighted the gender gap as a central risk to global resilience. Attendee demographics told a different story: for every 100 male participants, there were about 20women.

This isn't just a phenomenon confined to Swiss mountains; it happens repeatedly in Brussels. In the city where the future of technology is being drafted, negotiated and adopted, tech stages tend to remain homogeneous. While the European Parliament has made considerable strides, achieving 39.9 per cent female MEPs, in the technical »engines« of policymaking – namely the boards and expert groups shaping digital finance or AI governance – women tend to hold only a limited number of decision-making positions.

The overall result is that equal representation remains more promise than practice. Despite efforts to improve diversity, many panels and high-level delegations in certain fields, including tech, remained predominantly male. 

The leaky pipeline in tech policy

Only 14 per cent of global tech leaders are women. Just three Fortune 500 tech companies have female CEOs. And seven out of ten women in tech report that they have to work harder to prove themselves simply because of their gender.

This is linked to the »leaky pipeline« in action: as careers advance, systems fail to uphold the principles of equality, and women gradually exit. 

Spacelifts research indicates that 50 per cent of women who enter tech leave the field by age 35. This coincides with the »mid-career stall«, as many women report being passed over for promotion.

Junior vs senior: In European software engineering, women hold approximately 30 per cent of entry-level roles, but this number plummets to just 10–11 per cent for senior management and executive positions. There is a clear glass ceiling for CTOs, only 8 per cent of whom are women. 

Why does the pipeline leak? The 2025 Lovelace Report debunked the myth that women leave tech primarily for family reasons. The real drivers are systemic. First, career advancement (25 per cent): women with 11–20 years of experience are significantly more likely than men to have waited over three years for a promotion. Second, culture and recognition (17 per cent): »poor inclusive culture« and lack of recognition drive a high attrition rate. Next, the pay gap (23 per cent): the unadjusted gender pay gap in European tech remains high, at 23 per cent, largely because men hold the vast majority of high-paying senior roles

The result is visible on the most prominent Brussels stages, whether they be keynote stages or high‑level panels. The more senior and representative the role, the fewer women we see, if any. And that absence matters, because it shapes not only who speaks, but whose expertise defines our shared future.

That also explains the Davos phenomenon. Almost 3,000 cross-sector leaders from 130 countries attended this year. There were 400 »top political leaders«, including 65 heads of state, almost all of them men. The WEF estimates that 850 of the world’s top CEOs and chairpersons were present, and almost 100 leading »unicorns« (tech companies worth USD 1 billion or more). Again, the overwhelming majority were men, typically from North America and Western Europe.

Shifting the narrative in Brussels

In my experience as a public speaker on many Brussels panels over the past 10 years, I’ve seen how easy it is for organisers to default to the »usual suspects«. This is why I joined The Brussels Binder few years ago, of which I am now president. I found that the Binder finally provides practical solutions. We have a database with over 2,000 women experts, ready to shape the policy debate. With that we help event organisers to find voices that are too often overlooked. 

We target tackling one aspect of the overall problem at a time. Furthermore, collective actions are needed to tackle the persistent structural barriers, including biased hiring practices, limited access to funding for female-led tech startups, the glass ceiling and the lack of a culture that might help women to pursue top leadership pathways. 

These barriers are not always erected deliberately, they’re often unconscious, but the effect is the same. They shape who gets invited to speak on a panel and whose expertise counts when defining the policies that shape our future. 

Let’s take the digital-euro policy debate. As the EU advances its digital currency plans, discussions are dominated by technical experts, central bankers and economists, mostly men. However, the implications go far beyond finance: privacy, inclusion and democratic governance are at stake. Women’s expert voices are essential. Still, the more political importance a debate has, the fewer women there are. The same happens when the topic is European competitiveness, sovereignty, defence or resilience.

When women are invited to speak, too often it’s on the wrong stage, the »women-only safe stage«. (This is especially true every March, around International Women’s Day.) Instead of engaging on substance, they are asked: »You’re a CTO – what is it like to be a woman in the C‑suite?« While male peers debate ledger architecture and data governance, women are sidelined into conversations about identity rather than expertise.

I used to welcome such invitations even so, but over time, I’ve come to see how such stages can be counterproductive. They reinforce stereotypes, often deprive audiences of critical insights from highly qualified leaders and divert women away from the real discussions that shape the future. Saying yes to one often means halting the fight for women’s rightful place on another.

There’s no second chance to make a first impression! 

Representation does not start on the panel. How you begin in a new role matters. 

In my own journey in the digital finance space, I often found myself the only woman, especially in the early years. On the other hand, I rarely encountered situations in which my voice, expertise or contribution mattered less simply because of my gender. This I can explain in terms of two critical points: awareness and backing. First, colleagues who actively recognise and address gender bias create space for contributions to be valued equally. Second, having a business-critical mission with the right support system from the top from day one ensures that you carry messages that matter. When the top leadership views your mission as strategic enabling, and when executives are deeply engaged not only in achieving objectives but also in shaping perceptions about the importance of your function, the impact resonates in rooms where decisions are made. 

A guide for meaningful change

For leaders and executives aiming for true representation, I offer these steps:

• Move beyond the box: hiring women isn't just box ticking; it’s about giving them portfolios with real influence over business-critical decisions.
• Inclusion > diversity: metrics are easy; ensuring voices are actually valued in the room is the hard, necessary work.
• Expertise first: invite women onto panels based on their technical mastery, not just to talk about being a woman in tech.
• Address the algorithm: bias isn't just human. Recent evidence shows that platforms such as LinkedIn have unintentionally reduced the reach of women’s professional content. We must advocate for algorithmic transparency and fairness.

In closing

Despite these hurdles, I remain hopeful. We are no longer just »identifying the problem« but building the infrastructure to solve it, with regulation and impactful initiatives.

We are moving towards a world in which technology is present in every part of our lives. The future of technology – and the policy that governs it – is too important to be designed by a fraction of the population. We need to bridge the gap. With that, we won't just have a more equal society; we will have a more resilient and competitive one.