The Perils of Gender Beliefs for Men Leaders as Change Agents for Gender Equality
Autor/in:
Humbert, Anne Laure; Kelan, Elisabeth K.; van den Brink, Marieke
Quelle: European Management Review, 16 (2019) 4, S 1143–1157
Inhalt: This article examines the potentially damaging role that gender beliefs can play in hindering women’s equal representation in leadership positions. Based on a secondary analysis of a large-scale EU-wide survey (Eurobarometer 76.1), the article shows that essentialist gender beliefs lower support for equality interventions such as quotas or targets, particularly among men as leaders. The results show that discriminatory gender beliefs partially mediate this relationship and produce a more negative effect among men leaders. The paper contributes to understanding the role essentialist gender beliefs often lay the groundwork for gender discriminatory beliefs. Those in turn hinder support for effective gender equality measures. Gender essentialist beliefs can be held by everyone but are more prevalent among men leaders. We conclude that greater gender balance in leadership cannot be achieved without tackling underlying gender beliefs, particularly among men leaders since they are called upon to enact change. We thereby argue that simply asking for men to become change agents for gender equality is not an effective strategy if underlying gender beliefs are left unchallenged.
Selecting early-career researchers : The influence of discourses of internationalisation and excellence on formal and applied selection criteria in academia
Autor/in:
Herschberg, Channah; Benschop, Yvonne; van den Brink, Marieke
Quelle: High Educ (Higher Education), 4 (2018) 2, 61 S
Inhalt: This article examines how macro-discourses of internationalisation and excellence shape formal and applied selection criteria for early-career researcher positions at the meso-organisational and micro-individual levels, demonstrating how tensions between the various levels produce inequalities in staff evaluation. In this way, this article contributes to the literature on academic staff evaluation by showing that Selection Committee members do not operate in a vacuum, and that their actions are inextricably linked to the meso- and macro-context. This study draws on qualitative multi-level data that comprise institutional-level policies, recruitment and staff protocols, job postings and individual-level interviews and focus groups with Selection Committee members. Findings show that a majority of Selection Committee members consent to university policies and macro-discourses when evaluating early-career researchers, but a smaller group questions and resists these criteria. Furthermore, the analysis revealed four inequalities that emerge in the application of criteria and reflect on disciplinary differences between the Natural and Social Sciences. The article concludes that with only a few Committee members to critically question and resist formal selection criteria, they limit the pool of acceptable candidates to those who fit the narrow definition of the internationally mobile and excellent early-career researcher, which may exclude talented scholars.
Gender in Academic Networking : The Role of Gatekeepers in Professorial Recruitment
Autor/in:
van den Brink, Marieke; Benschop, Yvonne
Quelle: Journal of Management Studies, 51 (2014) 3, S 460–492
Inhalt: The aim of this study is to build a theoretical framework to understand how gendered networking practices produce or counter inequalities in organizations. We introduce a practice approach combined with a feminist perspective in organization network studies. The notions of gender and networking as social practices allow better insights into what people say and do in networks, and the ways that networking produces or counters gender inequalities. We draw on empirical material about professorial appointments in Dutch academia and analyse the accounts of gatekeepers illuminating their networking practices. The accounts show which networking practices gatekeepers routinely use in recruitment and how these networking practices are intertwined with gender practices. We use the notion of mobilizing masculinities to understand the self-evident identification of men gatekeepers with men in their networks, and to understand how both men and women gatekeepers prefer the male candidates that resemble the proven masculine success model. Furthermore, this study provides the first empirical insights in mobilizing femininities in which women search for and support women candidates. We show how the gender practice of mobilizing femininities is a more precarious and marked practice than mobilizing masculinities. Mobilizing femininities in networking is intended to counter gender inequalities, but is only partially successful. Through constructions of ‘who you can trust’ or ‘who is a risk’, gatekeepers exercise the power of inclusion and
exclusion and contribute to the persistence of structural gender inequalities.
Slaying the Seven-Headed Dragon: The Quest for Gender Change in Academia
Autor/in:
van den Brink, Marieke; Benschop, Yvonne
Quelle: Gender, Work & Organization, 19 (2012) 1, S 71–92
Inhalt: In this article we propose a multi-level distinction between gender inequality practices and gender equality practices to come to better understanding of the slow pace of gender change in academia. Gender inequality resembles an unbeatable seven-headed dragon that has a multitude of faces in different social contexts. Based on an empirical study on the recruitment and selection of full professors in three academic fields in The Netherlands we discuss practices that should bring about gender equality and show how these interact with gender inequality practices. We argue that the multitude of gender inequality practices are ineffectively countered by gender equality practices because the latter lack teeth, especially in traditional masculine academic environments.
CEWS Kategorie:Europa und Internationales, Hochschulen, Netzwerke und Organisationen, Statistik und statistische Daten, Gleichstellungspolitik, Berufungsverfahren
Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence : Sheep with five legs
Autor/in:
van den Brink, Marieke; Benschop, Yvonne
Quelle: Organization, 19 (2011) 4, S 507–524
Inhalt: Academic excellence is allegedly a universal and gender neutral standard of merit. This article examines exactly what is constructed as academic excellence at the micro-level, how evaluators operationalize this construct in the criteria they apply in academic evaluation, and how gender inequalities are imbued in the construction and evaluation of excellence. We challenge the view that the academic world is governed by the normative principle of meritocracy in its allocation of rewards and resources. Based on an empirical study of professorial appointments in the Netherlands, we argue that academic excellence is an evasive social construct that is inherently gendered. We show how gender is practiced in the evaluation of professorial candidates, resulting in disadvantages for women and privileges for men that accumulate to produce substantial inequalities in the construction of excellence.
Transparency in Academic Recruitment : A Problematic Tool for Gender Equality?
Autor/in:
van den Brink, Marieke; Benschop, Yvonne; Jansen, Willy
Quelle: Organization Studies, 31 (2010) 11, S 1459–1483
Inhalt: Gender research has made a call for more transparency and accountability in academic recruitment and selection in order to overcome the inequality practices that have led to an underrepresentation of women among full professors. This paper provides insight into the multiple ways in which the notions of transparency and accountability are put into practice in academic recruitment and selection, and how this has enhanced – or hindered – gender equality. The methods employed consist of a qualitative content analysis of seven recruit-ment and selection protocols, interviews with 64 committee members, and an analysis of 971 appointment reports of full professors in the Netherlands. Our analysis contributes to the study of organizations in three respects. First, it shows that recruitment and selection processes are characterized by bounded transparency and limited accountability at best. Second, it explains that the protocols that should ensure transparency and accountability remain paper tigresses, because of the micropolitics and gender practices that are part and parcel of recruitment and selection. Third, it contributes to gender equality theory in organization theory by showing how a myriad of gender practices simultaneously increases and counteracts gender equality measures in academia.