Women trail men in leadership roles, workplace tenure, and compensation. Understandably, the conversation often assumes an us-versus-them paradigm in which women are pitted against men.

Even our terminology emphasizes this construct. Terms like the “glass ceiling” and, more recently, the “broken rung” in the corporate leadership ladder point the finger at society’s gender biases for limiting women’s professional advancement. While damaging biases still exist, we notably neglect to acknowledge another factor in women’s workplace experiences: unhealthy dynamics between women.

In my career, I’ve been undermined in projects, excluded from meetings, and threatened with loss of my position on multiple occasions, but not by men—by other women.

A female leader once offered me a director-level position (for work I was already doing, with no increase in pay). I was skeptical, as I had learned through working with her that an offer almost always precedes an uncomfortable ask. I quickly realized that, in exchange for official recognition in this role, I’d need to agree to terms that raised ethical questions in my mind.

When I expressed my concerns and subsequently declined this so-called “promotion,” she informed me that I would no longer be permitted in meetings and restricted my other activities. In other words, “Don’t speak unless spoken to.”

Needless to say, this experience impacted my emotional health and sense of safety in my job. I ultimately left this role but encountered similar dynamics elsewhere in other ways.

Despite the popular narrative that “women support women,” the data reflects that my experience isn’t uncommon. When considering female bullies in the workplace, one survey found women target women 65% of the time.

While men may opt for more overt or direct tactics, another survey found that women tend to engage in covert or indirect bullying, such as social isolation, spreading rumors, or peer pressure to elicit a behavior from someone, all of which can be difficult for organizations to detect and manage.

Multiple studies also found that toxic dynamics between women can be serious enough that women consider leaving their jobs, which poses an expensive problem for employees and employers alike.

Despite these stark statistics, dynamics between women are rarely (if ever) part of the discussion about why there are fewer women at the top of organizations.

Let’s open ourselves to a more balanced conversation that recognizes both men and women have work to do in elevating women to leadership roles.

The cause of the “broken rung” should be seen as gender-neutral. As women, we need to recognize that how we treat one another impacts how many of us stick around to rise in leadership. We should do better for one another.

Importantly, simply increasing the number of women in leadership doesn’t address deep-rooted issues, like competition or implicit gender bias. While it was thought that women in senior roles would advocate for the rise of other women entering leadership, the data doesn’t entirely reflect this. A Yale study demonstrated that women chose a male candidate over another woman, even when they had identical resumes.

Women may believe there are limited seats available at the leadership table, which inherently drives competition for those coveted spots. Company incentives should exist for senior-level women to promote qualified junior-level women. This ensures the continuous advancement of women into leadership while diminishing fears of competition.

As for leadership hierarchies, many organizations have vertical reporting structures, where a single person serves as the gatekeeper to the leader directly above them, and so on.

First, this isolates senior leadership, making it more difficult for them to understand their employees’ actual experiences. If a leader is unaware that the company culture is being undermined, they can’t address the problem and, therefore, it becomes more pervasive.

Second, since research shows that 65% of bullying occurs top-down, reporting structures shouldn’t rely on the potential for poor interpersonal dynamics between an employee and their supervisor. Lateral leadership structures provide employees with access to multiple senior-level leaders to address their concerns.

Our traditional approach to the disparity between women and men in leadership ignores an important part of the discussion that is strongly backed by evidence. It’s time to recognize women’s impact on one another—and empower them to fix the broken rung.

More must-read commentary published by Fortune:

• How U.S.-China competition is benefiting the world—and reshaping the global economy
• ‘A head-in-the-sand approach’: The U.S. strategic drug stockpile is inadequate for a bird flu outbreak
• Gen Z’s enthusiasm for all things touchable is resurrecting the analog economy—and costing parents
• Fearless Fund counsel: The court ruling barring grants to Black women entrepreneurs should terrify CEOs

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.