While corporate leadership often champions a culture of aggression and risk, the actual financial and human toll of this ‘masculine energy’ is mounting in absenteeism, fraud, and turnover.
In January 2025. Mark Zuckerberg told podcaster Joe Rogan that the corporate world required more “masculine energy” and a culture that “celebrates the aggression a bit more.” Twenty months later. while that political movement appears weaker—Donald Trump’s average approval rating fell to 38% in September. the lowest of his second term—the ethos Zuckerberg praised remains embedded in the American workplace.
Corporate structures still heavily favor a specific brand of dominance. Women lead only 56 Fortune 500 companies this year, representing 11.2% of the list. Data from McKinsey and LeanIn.org’s “Women in the Workplace” report shows they hold 29% of C-suite roles. the same share as in 2024. Within these halls. shows of strength. risk-taking. and bravado are rewarded as leadership. while cooperation and caution are frequently dismissed as weakness.
The human and financial cost of this “masculine energy” is increasingly measurable. In 2024. men accounted for 4. 657 of the 5. 070 fatal work injuries in the United States—roughly 92%—a figure driven in part by a workplace norm that discourages admitting fear. skipping safety precautions. and refusing to ask for help. When two offshore oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico shifted their culture to prioritize safety and continuous learning. they saw accident rates fall by 84% and productivity rise spectacularly.
Financial malfeasance follows a similar pattern. The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners’ 2024 global study found that men committed 75% of occupational fraud cases. causing a median loss of $158. 000 per case. compared to $100. 000 for women. This behavior ripples outward; when employees see rule-breakers rewarded, motivation and trust in the employer evaporate.
A 2018 Harvard Kennedy School study identified the “masculinity contest” as a workplace governed by four implicit norms: display strength and stamina. show no weakness. put work first. and treat colleagues as rivals. When these norms dominate, research shows an uptick in toxic leadership, bullying, harassment, burnout, and intentions to quit. The “put work first” mentality turns the 70-hour workweek into a status symbol. leaving those who adhere to it blind to the suffering of the colleagues around them.
The disconnect between individual performance and team health is stark. Stanford University’s Robert Sutton once chronicled a star salesman. “Ethan. ” who cost his company $160. 000 in a single year once the firm accounted for the assistants who quit. anger management training. and the overtime imposed on others. Later research from Harvard Business School. analyzing 50. 000 workers. found that avoiding a toxic hire is worth $12. 489 to a company—more than double the value of a top-1% performer.
While corporate metrics focus on individual output. they consistently ignore the invisible labor—mentoring. organizing. and defusing conflict—that actually sustains productivity. As noted in *The No Club* by Linda Babcock and her coauthors. this vital work falls disproportionately to women and goes unrewarded. Meanwhile, in 2025, private education and healthcare, where women hold 77% of jobs, added 800,000 positions while all other sectors combined lost 500,000. These essential roles are often poorly paid and labeled as “low productivity” by economists. despite the fact that they enable the entire economy to function.
The bill for this culture of virility. as analyzed by French authors Lucile Peytavin and Élise Fabing. is eventually paid in harassment settlements. legal fees. workers’ compensation claims. and the high cost of replacing burned-out employees. Leaders who wish to mitigate these risks must move beyond surface-level metrics. By tracking turnover. sick leave. harassment complaints. and safety incidents by team. the data begins to tell the story of the leadership driving the results. The current reliance on dominance-based culture is leaving behind a trail of lost talent; for companies. the question remains whether the cost of that pride is one they can continue to afford.
corporate culture masculine energy workplace toxicity productivity leadership gender diversity