If you have all of these attributes and have kids, you will not progress as fast as someone who has all of these attributes and no kids: they have more time, more energy, more sleep, and more money. They can afford to take more risks. Finally, they probably have an aching void in their personal life which they will try to fill with career ambition. This is all reflected in women’s pay statistics: those who wait to have kids earn more over their lifetimes.
My point is that having kids massively strengthened those attributes in me—and others I've spoken with. I wouldn't have been in the same position otherwise.
All this is to say... it's not about fast or slow. It's about different and finding what works.
And there are counter-examples, too. I worked with a guy who ran a global business unit—a couple billion dollars, probably—and had 5 kids. Might he have been even more successful had he remained childless? Maybe... who knows. He was good either way.
I volunteered with a woman who is now the CEO of a Fortune 500 company. She brought her daughter with her, and doing social good as a family was an important part of her personal and. professional life.
So I don't mean to be a pedantic ass here, but the "I'm a CEO and I have a wonderful home life" is probably the exception, not the rule. The reality is that you can't be a CEO on a 9-5 schedule. You probably have a lot of help for all those times you have to travel, stay late, leave early, etc. Something is going to be scarified.
That being said, you can have a successful career without becoming a CEO or running a global business unit. So it's not 100% career or 100% family.
I strongly resent you suggesting that someone not having kids must mean they have an "aching void" in their life. Have kids if that makes you happy, but don't presume that this is what everyone's life must orbit around.
