Gender Equality in Academia and Research

• Publicly support the principle of gender equality in/for the organisation.
• Publicly endorse and sign the GEP, and endorse the structure responsible for its implementation (e.g. gender equality team).
• Make available sufficient financial and human resources to implement the GEP.
• Participate in the GEP development process as stakeholders when invited by the unit responsible for the GEP.
• Approve relevant documentation, procedures and activities supporting structural change towards gender equality in the organisation.
• Request regular updates regarding the implementation of the plan and progress (monitoring results) towards gender equality.

International comparison

Liability

Example: As stated by law, our institution is responsible for preventing and reporting on cases of sexual harassment. In accordance with EU directives, our national legislation has become very clear on this matter. We have reported cases of sexual harassment, but have no procedures or skills to comprehensively deal with it. This is, first of all, terrible for the victims. But if we want to avoid potential legal liabilities, we should invest in prevention through dedicated procedures, mechanisms and staff training.

Broader organisational change

Example: Our recruitment and internal evaluation procedures have been described as not being transparent by our policy authority. Meanwhile, our gender equality unit has detected gender bias in our recruitments and evaluations. Tackling the latter could be a good entry to challenge and upgrade our procedures!

• Publicly support the GEP and its activities.
• Participate in the GEP development/implementation process as stakeholders when invited by the entity in charge of the GEP to contribute their local perspective.
• Ensure the practical implementation of the measures, procedures and activities required by senior management and listed in the GEP.
• Ensure the integration of a sex/gender dimension in research and teaching in their unit.
• Instruct the relevant units to provide information and data to monitor the implementation of the GEP and progress towards gender equality.

Valuing managers’ contributions as agents of change and ability to create effective solutions

Example: Our institution has committed to high standards with respect to gender equality and our rector made a nice speech about this last week. And yet, without your knowledge of the organisation and of the people who work in it, we have no chance of succeeding. You are best placed to help us detect room for improvements in your area, and to co-create and test with us effective solutions. By participating in the next meeting, we can make sure that the issues and topics of your department are addressed and that your staff benefit from the actions.

Internal stimulation

Example: Since our communication department adopted a gender-sensitive communication, our institution has been quoted as an example at national level; female colleagues acknowledge that their work is better reflected; and news about gender equality issues, which are now more frequently displayed on the website, are the most tweeted and shared on Facebook. It would be great to trigger the same dynamics in our departments and faculties and to engage in discussion with students.

Referring to specific cases of management

Example: If we look at it objectively, the case of harassment we had to deal with last year has been extremely costly for us. The case was largely commented on within and outside the institution; we appeared to be insensitive and not proactive, and eventually our liability was mentioned in legal proceedings. We knew this could happen. Let’s start dealing with this seriously, by securing expertise, investing in prevention and providing assistance.

For research organisations: access to funding and competitiveness

Example: Attention to the sex/gender dimension in research content, gender balance in teams and gender balance in decision-making is extensively referred to in Horizon Europe and this is reflected in the current work programme. Seriously tackling these issues in our proposals could increase our competitiveness and our chances of being funded. Researchers should be involved in this process. We know about training sessions to support the integration of gender equality and a gender perspective in proposals. Let’s create awareness among researchers and project managers. In addition, having a GEP is now mandatory for all research organisations and public bodies that receive funding, so we should put that at the top of our agenda.

Internal synergies

Example: Our department of sociology has a rich record in supporting work–life balance among its academic staff. Did you know that a small fund was created to support childcare for those with parental responsibilities who wish to actively participate in international projects and conferences? It contributed to changing the lens through which getting engaged in dissemination and other activities requiring organisational mobility is perceived. Let’s plan a meeting with management and a few researchers to learn from their experience!

Access to funding, competitiveness and mainstreaming gender knowledge among researchers

Example: As a research centre carrying out research on climate change, we participated in the international conference held in Paris. Policymakers and non-governmental organisations underlined the need to also address prevention and mitigation of climate change impacts from a gender perspective. This eventually materialised in the final agreement signed by 194 countries. We realised that nobody addressed this issue in our team, and that the societal impacts of climate change in general were underinvestigated at our institution. We learnt that cross-disciplinary workshops were organised by a local university to integrate gender in our fields of interest. We might consider hosting a session and strengthening our ability to address societal challenges and gender aspects in future project applications.

When planning our gender equality strategy, we realised that, across the university, gender was core to nearly 10 % of ongoing Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) theses, and that gender was a relevant category for about 40 % of theses currently being carried out. However, apart from fields related to social sciences and humanities, we found little evidence of gender-sensitive research. Why could we not use the pool of knowledge accumulated in some fields or departments to irrigate other areas of knowledge? This would enhance transdisciplinary, interdepartmental cooperation and knowledge circulation. It might also benefit our success rate in accessing public funding, which tends to decrease with growing competition.

Example: Attention to the sex/gender dimension in research content, gender balance in teams and gender balance in decision-making are extensively referred to in Horizon Europe and this is reflected in the current work programme. Seriously tackling these issues in our proposals could increase our competitiveness and our chances of being funded. So, let’s get active and discuss the topic in one of our training sessions on gender in research and teaching.

Supporting women’s contribution to knowledge production

Example: In a field such as ours, laboratory experiments are time-consuming, and international organisational mobility is a prerequisite for a successful career. Women might both be given fewer opportunities to contribute to their full potential and be discouraged by external factors (such as work conditions or selection and appraisal criteria) from fully participating. If we do not change this, it is unlikely that our targets in improving the sex balance in our institute will ever be met. More change is needed: we need to put in place active schemes to encourage women’s participation in collaborative projects and also as project leaders. This implies making organisational mobility more inclusive and less costly. It may also require the better integration of career breaks or the provision of longer leave periods in their scientific careers for both women and men.

Awarding gender-sensitive research

Example: Let’s reward research projects or papers actively contributing to mainstream gender knowledge across academic disciplines. All fields should be encouraged to contest, and the call for participation should be put in a way that is also appealing to researchers working in technical fields. The same should apply to awards. The idea would be to make integrating gender an incentive for excellent and innovative research. Hence, awards would not necessarily have to be related to gender issues or gender research itself, but to the fields of expertise of applicants. This is working well elsewhere. Why not here?

• Participate in the GEP development process as stakeholders when invited by the unit responsible for the GEP or coordinate development/implementation of the GEP if the working group is located in the HR department.
• Collect and report on sex-disaggregated data on the organisation’s staff in a systematic way and deliver relevant data that can be used as a basis for GEP development.
• Develop gender-sensitive and gender-specific indicators to monitor progress towards gender equality in the organisation.
• Review and/or create recruitment and selection measures and procedures that contribute to a gender-balanced composition of the organisation’s staff at all levels.
• Review and/or set up measures aimed at a better reconciliation of professional and family life and working and caring duties, and a more gender-sensitive organisational culture.
• Review and/or introduce a harassment prevention policy and a complaints procedure.

Valuing human resources management as core to any process of change

Our institute applied under this gender equality scheme upon the initiative of our director. We have made a series of commitments and emphasised the work of our gender equality unit. Our chances to be selected are high. We have to be conscious that we are expected to challenge some of our processes, notably regarding recruitment and career management. Our director and her/his team cannot make this change happen without the support, expertise and assistance of the HR management department. And no action related to career management can be planned and undertaken without your knowledge of the institution. Should we establish a pilot group with your department to diagnose needs and potential challenges with respect to gender equality? We might also envisage how this gender equality scheme can fit with your current modernisation efforts regarding HR management.

Securing gender expertise to increase knowledge

Example: Our data collection is quite exhaustive on aspects such as hiring, career breaks and access to lifelong learning. But, except for staff categories, we produce little sex-disaggregated data. And yet, we know that career opportunities differ for our women and men staff, depending on their position, the scientific discipline and other factors. These differences are regularly discussed informally during talks with social partners and in management meetings in each department. It would be more appropriate to carry out a proper diagnosis to start solving potential issues from the actual situation, not from subjective perceptions or standpoints. Producing such a diagnosis requires external expertise. We have plenty at hand in the department of gender studies, including people working on career management and gender equality in the workplace. Shall we convene a meeting on this?

Challenging bias in recruitment and appraisal

Example: We are very selective about the profiles of applicants. We try to value different skills and experiences, yet we tend to receive fewer applications from women candidates, and our women staff have slightly lower chances of being promoted. I think we should put this under consideration in the next review of our process. Perhaps an external audit would be useful to identify potential gender bias? Are our job announcements appealing irrespective of the sex of candidates? Do we pay enough attention to career breaks and to different experiences in research and research management? Let’s clarify this.

Improving work–life balance

Example: Work environments that pay greater attention to work–life balance are reported to attract more talented researchers and staff and to retain them longer. The quality of time spent at work is also meant to enhance productivity and work relationships. Last but not least, as women and men still have to cope with family duties to different extents, improving work–life balance can help women to move up the career ladder and achieve their full potential. We have developed new tools to select and evaluate people, and to help them develop their skills. And yet, we have paid little attention to work–life issues. A survey or a forum could help us in assessing whether this has had an impact, and to collect innovative ideas about a gender-friendly work organisation.

Improving working conditions through tackling gender inequality

Example: Gender equality is not only about complying with legal requirements or individual cases. It also sheds light on working conditions, all along the career path. Recruitment, appraisal, lifelong learning, evaluation, career management tools: all these aspects can be considered from a gendered perspective and/or have (negative) gender impacts. Challenging gender bias can help us to challenge other biases about personal circumstances and to unravel intersecting inequalities.

Gender equality matters for all categories of staff, beyond traditional cleavages between permanent and non-permanent staff, academics and non-academics, etc. It is an objective that can create engagement, but also resistance, which is better overcome when social partners are engaged. A gender equality unit can often be perceived as external to social dialogue, but actually it can be an ally. As we are designing a GEP, we would like you to be a full part of the process, and share your knowledge about working conditions and work relationships with all engaged stakeholders.

Enhancing social dialogue by achieving gender equality

Example: It depends on the context, but dialogue with trade unions and other staff representatives can be quite formal. Be it framed by the law and/or by a collective agreement, it does not always provide space for assessing the status of gender equality, or to be innovative.

As we are launching what is meant to be a modernisation of our processes and ways of doing things with regard to gender equality, let’s use this opportunity. Let’s use it as a tool for modernising our social dialogue and making it more inclusive. In addition, gender bias or prejudices rely upon deeply entrenched stereotypes. This requires new ways of sharing ideas and communicating with each other. Co-creation and experience-based or participatory techniques can help us to highlight problems and reach consensus about solutions.

Tailored gender equality plan

Example: We are currently in the process of developing our GEP and its main goals and fields of action. We envisage a GEP that benefits the entire organisation and reflects the different situations in the institutes and departments. Therefore, we would like to include you in our discussions and are very interested in your perspective and input. Come to our meeting next week and make sure your concerns and issues are on the table.

Improving working conditions by tackling gender inequality

Example: Gender equality is not only about complying with legal requirements or individual cases. It also sheds light on working conditions, all along the career path. Recruitment, appraisal, lifelong learning, evaluation, career management tools: all these aspects can be considered from a gendered perspective and/or have (negative) gender impacts. Challenging gender bias can help us to challenge other biases about personal circumstances and to unravel intersecting inequalities.

• Active participation in the initiatives organised within the framework of the GEP as beneficiaries (e.g. training on unconscious gender bias and activities on gender-based violence, including sexual harassment).
• Integration of the sex/gender dimension into research (e.g. master’s and PhD theses).
• Providing their perspectives in a participatory GEP development and implementation process.
• Taking on responsibilities with regard to gender equality work (e.g. student representatives as members of committees, student mentors for future or first-year students).

Tailored gender equality plan

Example: We are currently in the process of developing our GEP and its main goals and fields of action. We envisage a GEP that benefits the entire organisation and reflects the different situations in the institutes and departments. Therefore, we would like to include you in our discussions and are very interested in your perspective and input. Come to our meeting next week and make sure your concerns and issues are on the table.

Study conditions

Example: As a university, we strive for a study environment in which everyone has equal opportunities. We want to ensure that students on our campus do not have negative experiences because of their gender and receive an education that takes into account different life realities. Therefore, we would like to include students in the development and implementation of our GEP. We would appreciate your attendance at our meeting next month to discuss possible ways for students to get involved.

• Provide mutual support and inspiration and exchange knowledge, expertise and experiences.
• Provide an outsider’s perspective.
• Develop joint initiatives (e.g. national events, policy lobbying) that have more impact (on the academic system).

Exchange and learning potential

Example: We are currently developing our first GEP. I heard you are in the same situation at the moment. Would you be open for an exchange? I think we could learn from each other’s experiences and maybe brainstorm on current issues.

Synergies

Example: We have adopted our first GEP and would like to organise a panel discussion on gender-based violence, including sexual harassment in academia. What do you think about joining forces and organising an event for both of our universities? Or maybe a national event?

Unconscious bias

Example: Even though we, as an organisation, are already committed to the cause of gender equality, it is still threatened by our own assumptions about what women and men are like. If an applicant speaks very loudly and sells their research very convincingly, you might say ‘HE is confident’, while if it is a women applicant you might ask ‘Why is SHE so loud?’ We should tackle this issue immediately and organise unconscious bias training for our reviewers.

Responsibility of funders

Example: As research funding bodies, we (partly) shape researchers’ careers by distributing public money. Thus, eligibility and assessment criteria need to be designed in a fair and inclusive manner, avoiding any discrimination based on sex/gender, age, discipline, ethnic background or working time. A person who has cared for two children for 7 years following a PhD will not be able to publish as many papers as a person without any care obligations. Many other funding bodies, such as the EU, the DFG [Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft] in Germany or Science Foundation Ireland, are taking up this mission of shaping research in a more inclusive way. How about we have a meeting next month to see where our funding programmes already consider this and to identify and discuss where we can become even more inclusive?