Managerial Discourse as Neutralizer? The Influence of the Concealment of Social Categories on the Experience of Workplace Bullying in Research Organizations
Quelle: Diversity and Discrimination in Research. Jörg Müller (Hrsg.), Clemens Striebing (Hrsg.), Martina Schraudner (Hrsg.), Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. 2023, S 331–364
Inhalt: This chapter looks at the discursive dimension of the working environment in research and higher education organizations; more specifically at neoliberal managerial discourse and at how it participates in shaping the way researchers, teachers and support staff perceive themselves and their experiences. It is based on a multiple case study and combines an intersectional and a socio-clinical approach. The empirical data is constituted by in-depth interviews with women conducted in Ireland and Chile, and includes some observations made in France. A thematic analysis of individual narratives of self-ascribed experiences of being bullied enables to look behind the veil drawn by managerial discourse, thus providing insights into power vectors and power domains contributing to workplace violence. It also shows that workplace bullying may reinforce identification to undervalued social categories. This contribution argues that neoliberal managerial discourse, by encouraging social representations of “neutral” individuals at work, or else celebrating their “diversity,” conceals power relations rooting on different social categories. This process influences one’s perception of one’s experience and its verbalization. At the same time, feeling assigned to one or more of undervalued social category can raise the perception of being bullied or discriminated against. While research has shown that only a minority of incidents of bullying and discrimination are reported within organizations, this contribution suggests that acknowledging the multiplicity and superposition of categories and their influence in shaping power relations could help secure a more collective and caring approach, and thus foster a safer work culture and atmosphere in research organizations.
Zwischen Wertschätzung und Diskriminierung : Umgang mit Vielfalt am Campus
Autor/in:
Sommer, Elisabeth; Thiessen, Barbara
Quelle: Diversität und Diskriminierung. Mina Mittertrainer (Hrsg.), Kerstin Oldemeier (Hrsg.), Barbara Thiessen (Hrsg.), Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. 2023, S 105–123
Gender and underrepresented minorities differences in research funding
Autor/in:
Cruz-Castro, Laura; K. Ginther, Donna; Sanz-Menéndez, Luis
Quelle: Handbook of Public Funding of Research. Benedetto Lepori (Hrsg.), Ben Jongbloed (Hrsg.), Diana Hicks (Hrsg.), Edward Elgar Publishing. 2023, S 279–300
Inhalt: This review is about the relationship between research funding allocation, gender and underrepresented minorities (URM). Research on gender and URM disparities in research funding is relevant as it speaks directly to the unexplained gaps in career advancement by illuminating potential effects of gender, race and ethnicity characteristics on productivity, reputation and compensation, offering potential explanations for the distribution of other types of organizational resources and career opportunities. The allocation of research funding is generally performed by the funding bodies, and it has been traditionally expected to operate under some values and principles shared by the science community such as merit-based allocations and equity and not be based on any ascriptive feature of the individuals, like gender, race or ethnicity. Additionally, social and policy pressures for the adoption of other social values exist, such as gender and race equality, or more generally, the observation of non-discriminatory practices. Despite the abundant literature on gender inequality in academia (see Ceci et al. 2014 for a review) and much less regarding URM (National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics 2021; Bernard and Cooperdock 2018), research remains largely inconclusive as to whether disparities are mainly the result of structural differences, self-selection or the effect of different types or discrimination or bias during the review and allocation processes. We will argue that there are analytical gaps as well as methodological challenges that should be addressed in order to increase the robustness of research on this topic.
The scope of this review refers to the recent situation of research funding in various countries and agencies with a focus on gender and URM disparities. It also tries to assess the changing trends. We consider research funding allocation as a process and at each phase there are factors that lead to disparities in funding outcomes across groups. Adopting this type of dynamic perspective means that cumulative effects play a relevant role. We focus on grant funding and not on baseline funding allocated through, for instance, hiring. We do not cover issues related to how research funding supports careers since this is addressed in Melkers, Woolley and Kreth (Chapter 18 in this Handbook). Furthermore, given the complexity and specificity of research funding allocation practices across agencies and countries, their variations and their context dependent effects, we do not discuss funding agency policies designed to provide a more equitable allocation of funding.
Schlagwörter:Ethnicity; Gender; gender differences; minority; Minority Group; race; research funding
CEWS Kategorie:Diversity, Wissenschaft als Beruf, Geschlechterverhältnis
Quelle: Diversity and Discrimination in Research. Jörg Müller (Hrsg.), Clemens Striebing (Hrsg.), Martina Schraudner (Hrsg.), Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. 2023, S 289–329
Inhalt: Building on work that explores the relationship between individual beliefs and ability to recognize discrimination (e.g., Kaiser and Major, 2006), we examine how an adherence to beliefs about gender essentialism, gender egalitarianism, and meritocracy shape one’s interpretation of an illegal act of sexual harassment involving a male supervisor and female subordinate. We also consider whether the role of the gendered culture of engineering (Faulkner, 2009) matters for this relationship. Specifically, we conducted an online survey-experiment asking individuals to report their beliefs about gender and meritocracy and subsequently to evaluate a fictitious but illegal act of sexual harassment in one of two university research settings: an engineering department, a male-dominated setting whose culture is documented as being unwelcoming to women (Hatmaker, 2013; Seron, Silbey, Cech, and Rubineau, 2018), and an ambiguous research setting. We find evidence that the stronger one’s adherence to gender egalitarian beliefs, the greater one’s ability to detect inappropriate behavior and sexual harassment while gender essentialist beliefs play no role in their detection. The stronger one’s adherence to merit beliefs, the less likely they are to view an illegal interaction as either inappropriate or as sexual harassment. We account for respondent knowledge of sexual harassment and their socio-demographic characteristics, finding that the former is more often associated with the detection of inappropriate behavior and sexual harassment at work. We close with a discussion of the transferability of results and policy implications of our findings.
Schlagwörter:beliefs; engineering education; Gender Role; meritocracy; sexual harassment; workplace harassment
CEWS Kategorie:Hochschulen, Sexuelle Belästigung und Gewalt
The FESTA project: doing gender equality work in STEM faculties in Europe
Autor/in:
Salminen-Karlsson, Minna
Quelle: Handbook of Gender and Technology. Eileen M. Trauth (Hrsg.), Jeria L. Quesenberry (Hrsg.), Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. 2023, S 90–105
Inhalt: This chapter presents the FESTA project, which worked 2011–2016 to advance gender equality in STEM departments in seven European countries. The focus was on improving the working environment of mainly junior researchers with the motto “a better working environment for women is a better working environment for all”. The aim of the chapter is to showcase work on organizational change to advance women’s careers in different environments. The chapter describes the diversity of the European scene when it comes to gender equality in STEM, and particular issues actualized when trying to improve the situation by means of a cross-European project. Four of the FESTA actions are described in detail: 1) collecting and presenting relevant metrics, 2) improving PhD supervision, 3) improving informal decision making and communication to be more transparent and 4) managing resistance. The chapter concludes with the suggestion that the STEM fields may be able to be forerunners in improving gender equality in the academe.
CEWS Kategorie:Naturwissenschaft und Technik, Gleichstellungspolitik
Dokumenttyp:Sammelwerksbeitrag
Nachhaltige Konzeptentwicklung für Gleichstellung: Genderbezogene Indikatoren an Hochschulen
Autor/in:
Eck, Sandra; Erbe, Birgit
Quelle: Diversität und Diskriminierung. Mina Mittertrainer (Hrsg.), Kerstin Oldemeier (Hrsg.), Barbara Thiessen (Hrsg.), Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. 2023, S 273–286
Inhalt: Die Zuhilfenahme von Statistiken und Vergleichstabellen gehört zum Grundhandwerkszeug von Gleichstellungsarbeit. Was könnte mehr Überzeugungskraft entfalten als eine Gegenüberstellung ungleicher Anteile von Frauen und Männern in einem bestimmten Feld? Eine auf Chancengleichheit ausgerichtete Politik braucht Zahlen zum Geschlechterverhältnis, um Handlungsbedarfe abzuleiten. Insofern ermöglicht Gleichstellungsmonitoring eine systematische, regelgeleitete und regelmäßige Datenerfassung, die die Gleichstellungsarbeit vor Ort unterstützt.
Grenzverletzungen und Machtmissbrauch an Hochschulen durch Schutzkonzepte präventiv begegnen
Autor/in:
Wolff, Mechthild; Engelhardt, Steffi
Quelle: Diversität und Diskriminierung. Mina Mittertrainer (Hrsg.), Kerstin Oldemeier (Hrsg.), Barbara Thiessen (Hrsg.), Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. 2023, S 261–272
Inhalt: Dargestellt wird der Entwicklungsprozess eines Schutzkonzeptes an der Fakultät Soziale Arbeit an der Hochschule Landshut. Dabei werden sowohl der Begründungszusammenhang als auch die Vorgehensweisen und die einzelnen Bestandteile beschrieben. Aufgezeigt werden zudem die Partizipationsmöglichkeiten für alle Fakultätsmitglieder sowie Studierende während des zweijährigen Entwicklungsprozesses.
International vergleichende Forschung über Formen geschlechtsbezogener Gewalt in Wissenschaftsorganisationen
Autor/in:
Lipinsky, Anke; Schredl, Claudia
Quelle: Sexualisierte Belästigung, Diskriminierung und Gewalt im Hochschulkontext. Sabine Blackmore (Hrsg.), Heike Pantelmann (Hrsg.), Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. 2023, S 43–54
Inhalt: Zahlreiche empirische Prävalenzstudien befassen sich mit dem Vorkommen geschlechtsbezogener Gewalt in der Wissenschaft. Die theoretischen Ansätze und Konzepte, welche die Studiendesigns und Operationalisierung der empirischen Messinstrumente bestimmen, stellen sich in einer Überblicksstudie im direkten Vergleich als heterogen dar. Die Heterogenität betrifft die Operationalisierung von Geschlechterkonzepten genauso wie die Auswahl der behandelten Gewaltformen. Durch die Entwicklung eines gemeinsamen Bezugsrahmens aus drei Dimensionen (Kontext des Geschehens, Geschlecht, Gewalt) lassen sich Unterschiede herausstellen, die ausschlaggebend für das spätere Verständnis der jeweiligen Prävalenzdaten sind. Ausgangspunkt unserer Analyse ist ein Mapping von Umfragestudien und Messinstrumenten aus dem Themenbereich geschlechtsbezogener Gewalt unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von sexualisierter Belästigung und Gewalt. Unsere Auswertung von neun Umfragestudien stellt Erhebungsinstrumente in den Mittelpunkt, die für die empirische Forschung im Hochschul- und Wissenschaftskontext entwickelt und dort zur Datenerhebung eingesetzt wurden. Die Befunde unseres Mappings weisen auf konzeptionelle Entscheidungen bei der Erhebung von sexueller Belästigung und Übergriffen hin, die unter Berücksichtigung des jeweiligen Forschungskontexts und der späteren Nutzungsabsicht der Ergebnisse getroffen wurden, einen direkten Vergleich der Prävalenzniveaus jedoch erschweren. Die hier angewendete Methode des selektiven Vergleichs weist auf Grenzen und Möglichkeiten der kulturübergreifenden Interpretation von Prävalenzdaten hin, selbst wenn die Umfragen alle aus dem Hochschul- und Wissenschaftskontext stammen.
Schlagwörter:comparative; gender based violence; harassment; survey; vergleichende Forschung
CEWS Kategorie:Europa und Internationales, Sexuelle Belästigung und Gewalt
Familie, Karriere oder beides? : Die spezifischen Vereinbarkeitsprobleme im Wissenschaftsbereich
Autor/in:
Lange, Janina; Ambrasat, Jens
Quelle: Übergänge in Wissenschaftskarrieren. Svea Korff (Hrsg.), Inga Truschkat (Hrsg.), Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH; Springer VS. 2022, S 95–123
Gender Bias in Peer Review panels : "The Elephant in the Room"
Autor/in:
Schiffbänker, Helene; Besselaar, Peter van den; Holzinger, Florian; Mom, Charlie; Vinkenburg, Claartje
Quelle: Inequalities and the Paradigm of Excellence in Academia. Fiona Jenkins (Hrsg.), Barbara Hoenig (Hrsg.); Susanne M. Weber (Hrsg.), Andrea Wolfram (Hrsg.), London: Routledge. 2022
Inhalt: Research councils claim to select excellent grant proposals in order to advance science. At the same time, grant success rates often differ between male and female applicants. In this chapter we address the question of why this is the case. Are male researchers more excellent than female researchers, or does the grant selection process suffer from gender bias? We answer this question using the European Research Council Starting Grant as a case, and focus within that on the life sciences. First, we investigate whether application success relates to gender, after controlling for excellence indicators: scientific productivity, impact, earlier grants, and the quality of the collaboration network. Using ordinal regression, we show that this is the case and that gender bias does indeed play a role in grant selection. Second, we build on interview data with panellists to uncover what lies behind gender bias. We find that general problems in peer review play a role, such as how to define and measure excellence. In addition, the panel composition affects female success rates. Finally, indications for gender stereotyping and gendered evaluation practices were identified.
Schlagwörter:ERC; excellence; Forschungsförderung; gender bias; grant application; Interview; life sciences; Panel; Peer Review; quantitative Analyse; research funding
CEWS Kategorie:Wissenschaft als Beruf, Geschlechterverhältnis
