The title is pretty crappy: it implies that if you learn to interrupt, you'll somehow get ahead. That's not what the data shows: the data shows that women got ahead, interrupt. It could be that there's a causal link, or that the causal link is in the opposite direction (they interrupt because they are senior as opposed to senior-because-interrupt; that link is also backed over the entire sample set, not just women, by the same data!), or that there is an underlying cause that
both makes them more likely to get ahead
and more likely to interrupt.
(The article makes no such conclusion, but merely suggests it.)