Men Do Most of the High-Level Jobs - IELTS Task 2 Band 9 Sample Essay

Sample Essay 1

In many countries, senior positions across politics, business, and academia remain dominated by men, prompting debates over gender quotas. I firmly believe that governments should not mandate a fixed percentage of top-tier roles for women. Instead, efforts should focus on dismantling structural barriers that prevent capable women from advancing. This essay will argue that merit-based advancement should prevail and that enforced quotas may lead to unintended social and professional consequences.

Reserving a specific percentage of leadership roles for women, while seemingly progressive, risks undermining the principle of meritocracy. High-level jobs typically require years of specialized experience, proven leadership, and a deep understanding of complex systems. If roles are distributed based on gender rather than capability, the selection process may become tokenistic. For instance, appointing a woman to a boardroom merely to satisfy a quota, rather than based on expertise, may foster resentment and even harm team performance. Furthermore, women who do earn their positions on merit may find their achievements questioned, as others might assume they were promoted due to policy rather than competence. Such dynamics can diminish self-worth and perpetuate workplace inequality in subtler ways. True gender equity requires enabling environments, not artificial numerical targets.

Moreover, mandatory quotas ignore the root causes of gender imbalance and instead focus on its symptoms. Women often face societal expectations, unconscious bias, and limited access to leadership networks, which cumulatively hinder career advancement. Addressing these challenges through better parental leave policies, flexible working arrangements, and mentoring schemes is far more sustainable. Take Sweden, for example, where no legal quota exists, yet women occupy a significant share of senior roles due to family-friendly policies and social attitudes that promote shared parenting. Encouraging such inclusive systems empowers all individuals, regardless of gender, to pursue and attain high-level positions. A long-term solution must foster equal opportunity, not impose artificial equality of outcome.

In conclusion, while the gender disparity in senior roles is undeniable, reserving a percentage of such jobs for women is not the answer. A more effective approach lies in removing systemic obstacles and cultivating an environment where talent—regardless of gender—can genuinely thrive.

Achieve your dream score with our detailed IELTS eBooks - your complete guide!

Sample Essay 2

A noticeable gender gap exists in high-ranking professions, prompting the proposal that governments should reserve a specific proportion of such positions for women. While this idea is rooted in promoting gender equity, I argue that institutionalising quotas is counterproductive. Rather than legislating representation, governments should prioritise reforming education pipelines and redefining societal perceptions of leadership. In this essay, I will argue that the issue lies in early-stage opportunity gaps and gendered expectations of authority—both of which demand deeper systemic change than surface-level quotas.

The most critical reason quotas fail to solve gender inequality is that they ignore disparities in the professional pipeline, particularly in male-dominated fields. High-level jobs in sectors like engineering, finance, and tech often require decades of industry-specific experience, yet women are significantly underrepresented in these fields from the outset. For example, global statistics show that fewer than 20% of engineering graduates are women, meaning the talent pool eligible for future leadership is already skewed. If governments reserve top positions for women without first addressing educational imbalances and professional development gaps, it creates a hollow victory. True progress demands earlier interventions—like targeted scholarships, inclusive school curricula, and mentorship programmes—so that women are equipped to compete at the highest levels. Without foundational change, quotas merely attempt to fast-track results while leaving structural inequalities untouched.

Another fundamental flaw in enforced quotas is that they entrench a narrow, often masculine, model of leadership instead of challenging it. Most corporate or political leadership norms—assertiveness, dominance, and decisiveness—are socially coded as male traits, making it difficult for women to ascend without conforming to these archetypes. Rather than forcing women into existing molds, we should redefine what leadership looks like, embracing qualities such as empathy, collaboration, and resilience—traits often undervalued in traditional frameworks. When countries like New Zealand and Finland elect women leaders, it isn’t because of quotas but because societal perceptions have evolved to see competence in diverse forms. Imposing quotas without shifting cultural narratives risks turning women into symbolic appointments rather than genuine change-makers. Cultural transformation—not numeric targets—produces sustainable gender parity.

In conclusion, rather than reserving leadership roles for women, governments should focus on long-term strategies that nurture inclusive education and evolve public conceptions of effective leadership. Empowering women to rise authentically, rather than artificially placing them, is the only way to achieve lasting equality.

Achieve your dream score with our detailed IELTS eBooks - your complete guide!