The Equitable Experience: Why Jessica’s Grad Journey Isn’t the Same as Jeremy’s
By Tanya Andrews, Founder of Trellis Collective
Jessica and Jeremy. They may be part of the same graduate intake, attending the same workshops, meeting the same mentors, and rotating through the same departments.
But their experiences in male-dominated industries?
Fundamentally different. And the impact of this is exactly what many organisations fail to appreciate.
The Grad Program Illusion
Graduate programs range from comprehensive, award-winning models, like those at Engineers Australia or Canva, to far more unstructured, unsupported rotation programs that exist simply because a company feels it ‘should have one’. The quality of these programs varies drastically, but even in the best-designed graduate programs, the gendered experience gap remains.
While most grad programs focus on building skills such as collaboration, critical thinking, and communication, they often assume an even playing field. In reality, the rules of engagement in a male-dominated environment differ significantly depending on gender.
And unless companies recognise and actively address these inequities, the promise of a “fair” grad experience falls flat.
So Why Does Jeremy’s Journey Look So Different from Jessica’s?
Let’s break this down.
1. Psychological Safety from Day One
Jeremy walks into a workplace filled predominantly with people who look like him, sound like him, and share similar backgrounds. This creates an innate sense of psychological, emotional, and physical safety. He doesn’t have to second-guess whether he belongs, and that sense of safety enables him to take risks, speak up, and fully engage from day one.
Jessica, on the other hand, may enter a team where she is the only woman, or one of very few. That invisible but undeniable feeling of being “other” creates a barrier to full participation, whether it’s in meetings, networking events, or informal learning moments. The cost of being wrong or seen as inexperienced feels much higher.
2. Networking: The Silent Career Accelerator
Networking is critical for career progression, but it’s often an inherently inequitable experience. While Jeremy naturally integrates into existing workplace networks, Jessica may find that networking opportunities, whether formal or informal, are less accessible or comfortable. She might not be invited to the same after-work activities or have the same ease of access to key senior mentors.
According to a 2023 report by Deloitte, women are 25% less likely to report having access to senior leaders as mentors or sponsors compared to men in the same grad cohorts. This has knock-on effects for visibility, sponsorship, and long-term opportunity.
3. Opportunities for Stretch Assignments
In many industries, access to high-impact projects is often determined informally, based on who managers “see potential in” or who they feel comfortable putting forward. Jeremy, benefiting from greater visibility and alignment with industry norms, is more likely to be handed those career-defining assignments.
Jessica? She’ll likely have to fight to be seen, prove herself repeatedly, and even then, still be overlooked.
These missed opportunities at the start of a career create long-term ripple effects: from delayed progression to weakened confidence. Research by PwC shows that women often self-select out of stretch opportunities because they assume they need to be overqualified before putting themselves forward, whereas men tend to apply earlier.
4. The Weight of Representation
Whether they realise it or not, many early career women bear the additional burden of being a “representative” for all women in their field. If Jessica struggles, it’s not just seen as her personal failure, there’s often an underlying perception that “women just don’t fit here.”
Jeremy, on the other hand, gets to be seen as an individual, free from the weight of expectation or stereotype. This emotional tax takes a toll on confidence, engagement, and retention.
A Grad Program isn’t the Early Careers 'Support' solution, it’s a foundation to be equalised
Here’s the critical takeaway: simply having a graduate program does not solve the unique challenges early career women face in male-dominated landscapes. Without recognising and addressing these inequities, companies are unintentionally reinforcing the same systemic barriers they claim to be tackling.
This is where the Trellis Collective early-career development "First Five" program comes in.
Our program acts as a powerful equaliser, designed specifically to fill the gaps that traditional graduate programs miss. It equips early career women with practical tools, confidence-building frameworks, and ongoing support that helps them not just survive, but thrive.
It’s not about dismantling grad programs. It’s about making them work for everyone. That means actively designing them with equity in mind:
- Build targeted mentorship: Connect early career women with relatable role models who’ve navigated similar paths.
- Sponsor, don’t just support: Ensure women are actively championed for opportunities, not just included in development conversations.
- Measure the experience: Track outcomes across gender and diversity markers, not just attendance or completion.
- Normalise inclusion practices: Embed habits that support equity, like rotating meeting facilitators or setting intentional mentoring expectations.
As the OECD noted in its 2022 Gender Equality report, the earlier organisations intervene with intentional support, the higher the retention and promotion rate of women over time.
Equity isn’t about treating everyone the same. It’s about recognising where the differences lie, and having the courage and strategy to do something about them.
If we truly want to build an equitable pipeline, we need to start by acknowledging that Jessica’s experience will never be the same as Jeremy’s.
Unless we take action to change it.